Telco CEO: Consumers Have 'Double Standards' Over Data Privacy (thestack.com) 67
An anonymous reader writes: Despite consumers continuing to criticize corporate attempts at monetising data, they are happily handing over data to major tech companies such as Facebook, according to the head of Telefonica Deutschland, Thorsten Dirks. Dirks argued that there is a double standard among consumers who 'scrutinize any attempt to make money off their data', while at the same time 'handing over data voluntarily to companies such as Google and Facebook.' These firms, he opined, are stealing away business across the very infrastructure that telcos have invested billions in. Calling for a wide debate around data privacy in Germany, Dirks said that he was looking into ways to make money from Telefonica Deutschland's huge store of customer data. One proposition was to leverage the anonymised data of its 44 million mobile subscribers' location and movements to support crowd and traffic control.
Because it's my choice (Score:5, Insightful)
fuck the telcos.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I know what I've told them.
Possibly, but I would be surprised if you knew *everything* they gleaned from you.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I know I *don't* know everything they've gleaned from me.
Doesn't matter.
I am with OP in that it's a severe difference between giving me a service for my data (effectively paying me for my data) and then monetizing it, versus hoovering up my data for using a service I'm *PAYING FOR* and trying to monetize that as well.
-nB
Re: (Score:1)
Also,
When I choose to give google my info I benifit.
They know where I am because I'm ok with the trade of telling them where I am in exchange for what Google Now does with it, or Google Navigation. They have access to my email because they give me free very robust email.
What do the phone companies want to give me? a piece of the money they make? let me chose?
Also overlooking the fact: (Score:2, Insightful)
That with Facebook/Google, you are getting a SERVICE in EXCHANGE for your personal data. Whereas with the Telcos you are EXCHANGING MONEY for a SERVICE over which you expect privacy except during a legally filed and approved wiretapping warrant by a member of law enforcement of good standing. Not that either of those situations actually happens, but that is the idealized belief people are under.
Telco bosses: If you want to get all that personal information, then offer free telephone service in exchange for
Re:Because it's my choice (Score:5, Insightful)
When I give personal info to FB or Google or whoever I make the decision to do so, and I know what I've told them
The obvious answer that is so obvious that it is almost as if the telco's are deliberately ignoring it. If I could encrypt every possible element of my network traffic from them (I mean down to layer 2), I would. I want them to know NOTHING and I want them to be able to hand over to the government, NOTHING. Even if you use VPN services, they know you are doing that. Already overshare.
Facebook and Google I can lie to and mislead, it's my choice what to disclose and how.
Re: (Score:2)
cool, the Verband der Privaten Netzdienstleister (or whatever) can make layer 2 encryption mandatory, and work out a fee structure; maybe a sliding scale where paying a premium keeps your information completely encrypted (to subsidize the costs of implementation), while others can choose a "managed" privacy profile. where there previously wasn't choice, there would now be choice.
Re: (Score:1)
Just like the telephone comes don't get a right to listen in on everyones phone calls in an effort to make more money, ISPs shouldn't be permitted to listen in on everyones internet traffic in an effort to make more money. They were paid to transmit the data. Job Done.
Re: Because it's my choice (Score:2)
But can the telco do analytics on call patterns to provide data to companies who would be interested in knowing, say how many telephone subscribers aged 20-30 in a specific area call fast-food numbers more than once a week.
Re: Because it's my choice (Score:2)
"When I give personal info to FB or Google or whoever I make the decision to do so, and I know what I've told them."
Really? Th8s is exactly the double standard. You *think* that because you don't use facebook that they don't know about you. But, every Facebook 'like' button on any website you use is tracking you. Using this information, and correlating visits to various sites by non-Facebook users and Facebook users, Facebook probably already has a profile on you and can determine to some degree your intere
Double Standard? (Score:4, Interesting)
Voluntarily (Score:5, Insightful)
What part of "Voluntarily" does this asshole not understand?
I am aware that Google and FB use the data I provide. I am aware that by using their service, I am the product and not the customer. I know what I am handing them.
On the other hand, I am a *CUSTOMER* of the ISP, not the product. I am ***PAYING*** them for the line. I have no idea what data they are harvesting and selling.
If this asshat can't understand the difference, maybe he should just go get some cheese for his whine.
Re:Voluntarily (Score:4, Informative)
I am aware that Google and FB use the data I provide.
You're probably a minority. Most people seem to have very little idea of what Google and Facebook do with their data and are often quite shocked when they learn. The most common reaction I've seen is for people to disbelieve because they think that what Google and Facebook are doing must be illegal.
Big difference... (Score:5, Insightful)
I PAY my ISP or Cell provider, so I don't expect them to try and make even MORE money off of my data. Google and Facebook are "free" services, and we are well aware of the fact that they are using our data (and act accordingly, if we are concerned)
Companies don't understand the implications data (Score:1)
It's not a double standard, you pillock (Score:3)
It's rather that you didn't get permission!
more importantly (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
What are the telcos offering in exchange for the data they want to collect?
Free Ads!!!!!
Anonymization can't be done on big datasets (Score:1)
Anonymization can't be done on big datasets, and the reason can be found in fingerprint analysis based on information theory: see EFF on fingerprinting [google.com].
Hey Thorsten? (Score:2)
Call again when I hand over YOUR information to Facebook. Until then your comparison sucks.
What people do with their own information is their own business. If they trade it for ... whatever Facebook offers them, that's THEIR business. Not yours. Likewise, if you hand over YOUR information, it's YOUR business.
If you want to hand over my info, please first go play with something poisonous.
Re: (Score:2)
Give and Take (Score:4, Insightful)
I have a variety of things. I give some things away, as is my right. If someone comes up and takes a thing from me, even a thing I was going to give away to someone else, I may get upset. This is not a double standard. This is how "things" work.
Oh the humanity! (Score:2)
People actually being allowed to CHOOSE which companies are allowed to use their personal info.
Why is that a bad idea, again?
(Corporate entities that people widely choose to NOT trust with their data, especially ones that most people have no choice but to be customers of, if they want decent broadband Internet, need not answer)
Pfft (Score:1)
It's about as much as a double standard as rape. Oh sure you fuck any piece of meat that passes your path, but when we decide to take it without permission, that's just a double standard. You're already giving it up to everyone else, what's the difference?
Two Different Beasts (Score:1)
There is one very clear difference in these two situations.
1. When it comes to a Telco, they have my information due to the need for me to provide it pursuant to a contractual agreement for service that was formed between the two of us. I never agreed to, nor desired for them to monetize my data in addition to the money I pay them for the service they provide me.
2. When it comes to Facebook or the like, I am providing my information in exchange for a free service where I am for all intents and purposes the
Logical Fallacy Much? (Score:2)
the very infrastructure that telcos have invested billions in
That telcos financed using subscriber fees and government subsidies. We paid for it, we'll use it as we please.
I don't think it means what you think it means... (Score:2)
Seriously.
I can volunteer what information I wish to whomever I like, for or without reason.
That does not constitute approval for anyone else to know any of it.
Jealous much?
I control what they collect too .... (Score:2)
Not only is it about voluntary vs involuntary -- but when I'm on social media, I get to say whatever I'd like people to associate with my name. If you save/store that, great. I often post opinions and commentary that I see no reason to prevent others from archiving away, or even using to try to "profile" who I really am.
What disturbs me is when somebody mines my data without permission, not even giving me anything useful in exchange for it, and gives me no say in editing what they do or don't keep. I may b
Information is a form of payment (Score:2)
People give their information in exchange for the use of services.
If the telco wants to do that, it needs give the option of charging money OR selling customer data.
They're ALREADY getting paid (Score:2)
I already pay my provider for my internet service. They are entitled to nothing more than that.
Facebook and other services like it require no monetary compensation on the part of the consumer, and the service collects data in exchange for using it.
Both services are paid, one with money, one with data. Why do you think you should get both?
Re: (Score:2)
That's the thing if I don't want to share my data with facebook I could use a paid service that's not ad supported although they are few an far between next to the ad supported free to use sites.
If a telco wants to collect my marketing data they better be offering free service just like facebook and google.
The stupidity is strong with this one... (Score:2)
There is no "double standard" you fucktard. When you sign up to Google, Facebook and others, you know what sort of data you are sharing and that they'll be leveraging that to make the service profitable. Those services are driven by ad revenue, so it's clear that being free of charge in direct monetary sense, they'll have to do something to continue providing it.
And even then, neither Facebook nor Google are free of scrutiny and complaints on sharing user data. Some of the biggest scandals both companies we
Because I pay for telecom services (Score:2)
The important difference is ... (Score:2)
The important difference is ... the free decision.
I can post my full CV here, if i want it. And i still expect slashdot not to publish my mail address.
Just because *I* decide to publish one thing, that doesn't mean OTHERS may decide to publish other (in their opinion less important) things about me.
It's MY data. So i can do whatever i want with it. You cannot.
It isn't the same at all (Score:2)
FB (etc) is a "free" service that you pay for with your privacy. Most people should be aware of that. Many probably are not. I choose not to utilize them.
The "telco" is not a free service. We pay for it already. Many of us have little choice in which one to use as we are only served by one provider. Even where there are multiple providers, if they all do it, then there is still no choice.
The "entitlement" factor is at work. Why does everyone who can somehow get possession of any of your data feel entitled t
Like a Nun, Never Had It, Never Will (Score:1)
Guess it paid off never having a Facebook account.
Alas there is still slashdot.