Random Fashion Thoughts (Part 3: Style farmer strikes back) - our general discussion thread

[LA Guy]

You don't have to, though. If you wanted to, you can live like you did in the 80s.

If your work demands email, then just use email and nothing else. This is not some despotic and dystopic future.

I do this a fair bit. I use credit cards, but also a fair bit of cash, mostly because using Amex to buy a scone seems slightly obnoxious. I don't drive, though my wife dies, so I scoot a lot. I don't always bring my phone with my on weekends, not because I don't want someone tracking me, but because I'd like to drink a coffee and have a snack in peace. I will bring it if I might have to coordinate with my wife or kids, but my daily phone use is under an hour a day. I'll check stuff when I wake up, and maybe I'll check stuff before I go to bed.

I use an old CRT monitor hooked up to my military Toughbook (Panasonic CF-31) which has no built in mics or cameras, and I 100% refuse to use skype or anything that uses video, just because I find it super distracting. I will facetime my kids when I travel, but that's about it. No one else. About 90% of my internet use is from a single location.

 

[gdl203]

I use an old CRT monitor hooked up to my military Toughbook (Panasonic CF-31)

 

[LA Guy]

I think that what advertisers and companies in your ecosystem track and serve ads to are your persona more than who you actually are. I don't think any of these Facebook advertisers trying to sell you a wifi meat thermometer actually care who you actually are or what your name and address is, private information you actually care about - this is not really useful or interesting to anyone, except maybe for some form of government investigation.

What is useful is that your cookie/browser/persona has an interest in A, B and C, and therefore you're a better audience for selling my meat meter than some other cookie/browser/persona who never goes on bro-grilling websites, etc... I don't even know who the users are that are targeted by ads because of their cookie activity - nor do I really care. I'm just interested in the results - do more people click on them, what's the conversion rate...

So yes, we are being tracked constantly but all that data is used to tailor commercial activity to your screen, not so much to mount a "file" on you as a person for nefarious objectives.
Unless rigging an election is considered as a nefarious objective

If it helps anyone sleep better at night, "rigging an election" is likely harder than getting someone to buy something at full price from MrPorter (still unprofitable!). At best, it's a blunt weapon. If you include in the error bars, your resuls generally go from "doing slightly the opposite of what you want people to do," to "maybe sorta kinda do what you want it to do." It's not like Russians have some secret internet mind controlling kung fu.

 

[LA Guy]

View attachment 1326165

What an awesome movie.

 

[gdl203]

It all goes back to the Russians

 

[erictheobscure]

It's not like Russians have some secret internet mind controlling kung fu.

very comforting, guy who is typing in front of a 1998 crt monitor in his 100% camera-free bathroom-office-masturbatorium lined with aluminum foil

 

[FlyingMonkey]

I am very much enjoying this discussion.

 

[Friend]

If it helps anyone sleep better at night, "rigging an election" is likely harder than getting someone to buy something at full price from MrPorter (still unprofitable!). At best, it's a blunt weapon. If you include in the error bars, your resuls generally go from "doing slightly the opposite of what you want people to do," to "maybe sorta kinda do what you want it to do." It's not like Russians have some secret internet mind controlling kung fu.

Yeah, the best Facebook has managed for any clothing-related ad preferences to my profile is suggesting that I like "textiles" and "cotton", which is not untrue, but also fits the profile of plantation owner more than is strictly flattering

 

[dieworkwear]

A friend of mine works on homeless services here in the Bay Area. We were talking about a program she's helping to push, which would commit people in institutions, even if it's against their will, if they meet a certain standard. I can't remember the standard, but the bar is very high. Basically, if the government determines you to be a danger, they're allowed to commit you to an institution even if you haven't broken the law (they can only hold you for a certain amount of time).

It reminded me of a Scandinavian program. I can't remember the specifics, but another friend of mine who does research in Nothern Europe noted how a government employee will stop by your house if you do certain things. They're basically doing a mental health check. Americans would never stand for this kind of intrusion because of our fears over privacy. We're probably the furthest "right" on the liberal scale (e.g. we value liberty).

I realize there are legitimate concerns over privacy. And even the most liberal states break liberal norms (FBI with MLK, etc). And there may be reasons why you don't want big corporations or governments having that power. Whenever privacy concerns come up, people's minds immediately jump to 1984 or the PRC in China. It's always this dystopic place.

But I also think that the biggest threat to American society isn't this consolidation of power, but rather the kind of cynicism that pervades everything nowadays. People are cynical about every kind of big institution -- big banks, big government, big media, big universities, big corporations. It's always "look at how these experts got it wrong." Or "look at how these doctors prescribed this unnecessary drug." Or "look at how the big media was paid off."

But the alternatives are often worse. Instead of trusted institutions such as the NYT, which sometimes gets it wrong, you have totally unprofessional and partisan media that doesn't even aim for the truth. They just inflame passions. Instead of big research institutions, you have obscurantism. Instead of big medicine, you have folk medicine.

The story that Teger posted -- the one about Target -- is less about internet tracking and more about how information has scaled. In the 90s, companies still tracked you with rewards cards and built consumer profiles (some of that info was even sold to third parties). But now with more processing power and more information, you can scale that up. There are legit concerns to scaling. The subprime mortgage crisis was partly about how banks were able to process huge amounts of information, which ended up hiding risk. But this is not the same as GoogleAds personalizing info. This is a critical distinction. As far as I know, companies that collect information across sites, such as third-party ad servers, are not personalizing your info.

There's also a ton of personalized info already. Your ISP had all your browsing data. Your credit cards have a lot of your purchase data. Whenever I read stories about internet privacy, it often feels like people are posing this as new.

There are good reasons for privacy. You may not want your employer to have your medical information. But the best way to deal with those things is to regulate, which ironically requires trust in institutions (big government). IMO, you can depend on culture to prevent the worst of outcomes (e.g. 1984). Granted, Americans have a pretty spotty record when it comes to protecting the rights of minorities in times of crisis, but we're still a lot better than many other countries. I think a lot of information aggregation now is pretty benign, and concerns are often borderline conspiratorial, if not at least cynical. But if I'm being honest, I'm also personally fine with more intrusion to achieve certain social goals.

 

[cb200]

Christopher Wylie: 'The fashion industry was crucial to the election of Donald Trump'

The Cambridge Analytica whistleblower reveals how certain brands were weaponised during the US election campaign

www.theguardian.com

 

[gdl203]

With all this bùlszit, I completely missed that I passed 40k posts and now no one cares and there will be no celebration of this important milestone. I blame all of you equally

 

[Friend]

Christopher Wylie: 'The fashion industry was crucial to the election of Donald Trump'

The Cambridge Analytica whistleblower reveals how certain brands were weaponised during the US election campaign

www.theguardian.com

thankfully Crocs found the solution to save us all

 

[smittycl]

Do you see how ridiculous this gets? I mean, you might as well be a fundamentalist prepper.

I think you're quite off base tonight and overreacting more than a bit. No fundamentalist prepping here. Let's let Pompeo and the Rapture Patrol do that.

Lots of debate to be had. I agree with you on cynicism being too prevalent and also for the need for regulation. Data tracking, thinking Facebook and Google, has gone way beyond tying individuals to cookies. Data is being used to manipulate and, at least here in the US, legislators have punted the initiative to the big tech companies. Good to see the EU beginning to take action.

 

[Friend]

The story that Teger posted -- the one about Target -- is less about internet tracking and more about how information has scaled. In the 90s, companies still tracked you with rewards cards and built consumer profiles (some of that info was even sold to third parties). But now with more processing power and more information, you can scale that up. There are legit concerns to scaling. The subprime mortgage crisis was partly about how banks were able to process huge amounts of information, which ended up hiding risk. But this is not the same as GoogleAds personalizing info. This is a critical distinction. As far as I know, companies that collect information across sites, such as third-party ad servers, are not personalizing your info.

Yep, I agree with most of what you wrote. The caveat I would add to your distinction is that true individualization of data (i.e. attaching it to you as a 'real' person) isn't actually the thorniest question, because that does predate the internet generation of tech - it's how the massive scaling of data collection has fundamentally changed the nature of what's possible and the norm for using it. The US is incredibly far behind in tackling this. Persona-based advertising is one of the current examples, but is just a piece of it, and I agree with you that the discourse tends to get histrionic. I'd say that's partly a natural outcome of being stuck reacting to the kind of unplanned economic structure we're in, though.

Btw, would highly recommend Azeem Azhar's newsletter for anyone who finds this category of topics interesting.

 

[Coldsnap]

I don't have a smart phone anymore (over a year now without one) and use a dedicated high res audio player. It's weird as ****, but I don't have to worry about any of the **** discussed in the past couple pages anymore. hahahaah.