From the comments: Hits the nail on the head. It's such a blatant lie, and everyone knows it. I think it's time for the concept of a "privacy policy" to evolve into something more along the lines...
From the comments:
One of my favorite trends is small startups claiming "nothing will change" when they’re bought by one of the big guys.
Hits the nail on the head. It's such a blatant lie, and everyone knows it. I think it's time for the concept of a "privacy policy" to evolve into something more along the lines of a binding constitution. Right now, it's too easy and common for a new startup to draft a nice privacy-respecting document, only to revise it down the road after they realize there's money to be made from their customers' data. Or, in situations like this, for an acquiring company to pull the rug out from the existing customer base when its goals run counter to the original business model.
I want to see companies affirm to their customers, in short, plain English sentences, that...
...the only data they collect is that which users have expressly authorized them to have;
...they won't share any user data (or metadata) with any third parties for any reason;
...they won't compile that data into predictive models or behavioral profiles, or use it for any purposes other than the explicit needs of the advertised product/service, including targeted marketing;
...all of a user's data (and metadata) will be permanently deleted within 30 days of that user's account deletion, which users can perform themselves in a straightforward manner;
...all of a user's data (and metadata) can be downloaded by that user at any time, in a straightforward manner;
...most importantly, these terms are permanent and only subject to revision by amendment which preserves the original text. Amendments are only permitted to further limit the company's collection or use of user data, never broaden it. The terms cannot be revoked by future company leadership for any reason.
I don't know, I'm probably overlooking some reason why this hasn't happened yet but it seems like a pretty good idea to me. A privacy policy is meaningless when it's vague, overcomplicated, and can change on a whim. Gotta give it some teeth.
I echo these feelings. I really do feel disappointed when a company who’s products I use/like gets snapped up and absorbed into one of the tech giants. Sometimes, you get something good like when...
The overwhelming reactions were consternation, concern, and exhaustion.
Specifically that an independent company was once again snapped up by one of the big tech giants.
I echo these feelings. I really do feel disappointed when a company who’s products I use/like gets snapped up and absorbed into one of the tech giants.
Sometimes, you get something good like when Apple bought the company behind the Kinect sensor and turned it into FaceID. Most of the time, however, they just slowly fade away and get “sunsetted”.
The idea of an Echo that is also a a mesh WiFi router for a intriguing though.
i'm even hesitant at this point to say it's good when something good comes of a corporation snapping up startups. because yeah, something good did come of it, but with the consequence that...
Sometimes, you get something good like when Apple bought the company behind the Kinect sensor and turned it into FaceID. Most of the time, however, they just slowly fade away and get “sunsetted”.
i'm even hesitant at this point to say it's good when something good comes of a corporation snapping up startups. because yeah, something good did come of it, but with the consequence that established technology companies become increasingly hard to challenge and diversity in the marketplace becomes increasingly hard to come by because everything that could revitalize competition is bought out and monopolized before it can make an impact.
I agree. Maybe "good" wasn't the correct wording. I meant that at least in a situation like that, you can at least see where the product was put to use, rather than something like Facebook buying...
I agree. Maybe "good" wasn't the correct wording. I meant that at least in a situation like that, you can at least see where the product was put to use, rather than something like Facebook buying Instagram, which was purely to head off competition.
From the comments:
Hits the nail on the head. It's such a blatant lie, and everyone knows it. I think it's time for the concept of a "privacy policy" to evolve into something more along the lines of a binding constitution. Right now, it's too easy and common for a new startup to draft a nice privacy-respecting document, only to revise it down the road after they realize there's money to be made from their customers' data. Or, in situations like this, for an acquiring company to pull the rug out from the existing customer base when its goals run counter to the original business model.
I want to see companies affirm to their customers, in short, plain English sentences, that...
I don't know, I'm probably overlooking some reason why this hasn't happened yet but it seems like a pretty good idea to me. A privacy policy is meaningless when it's vague, overcomplicated, and can change on a whim. Gotta give it some teeth.
That's simple -- the people who would benefit from such a thing have nothing to offer the people who make the decisions.
I echo these feelings. I really do feel disappointed when a company who’s products I use/like gets snapped up and absorbed into one of the tech giants.
Sometimes, you get something good like when Apple bought the company behind the Kinect sensor and turned it into FaceID. Most of the time, however, they just slowly fade away and get “sunsetted”.
The idea of an Echo that is also a a mesh WiFi router for a intriguing though.
i'm even hesitant at this point to say it's good when something good comes of a corporation snapping up startups. because yeah, something good did come of it, but with the consequence that established technology companies become increasingly hard to challenge and diversity in the marketplace becomes increasingly hard to come by because everything that could revitalize competition is bought out and monopolized before it can make an impact.
I agree. Maybe "good" wasn't the correct wording. I meant that at least in a situation like that, you can at least see where the product was put to use, rather than something like Facebook buying Instagram, which was purely to head off competition.