Re: [projectvrm] Privacy is SO overrated - Scoble

[Mary Hodder < >]

Doc.. this is exactly why I answered Robert on the first post.. early on in 
comments.. and got a dialog going..
but then stopped..

and why I didn't talk on the second one. That was deliberate, because the 
discussion devolved
into trolling and extremes.. either privacy-nut or data-exhibitionist-nut 
extremes.

And the reality is that we are here on this list and elsewhere to talk about 
the subtle and less inflammatory middle
where most reside.

Robert is about publicity and he'll do whatever to get it. He's not about 
solving problems for real people.

But still he and I have had many in-person discussions and I was trying to 
get him to empathize with people less fortunate.

Didn't work, so I got off.

I agree completely that producing constructive things for people in the 
middle, the vast majority of people, is the key.

VRM is about autonomy and choice.. and transparency... not extremes.

mary


On Jun 19, 2014, at 4:10 PM, Doc Searls wrote:

> A few months back a friend said, "(So and so) is a waste of time."
> 
> Much as I like Robert as a friend, for us he is a waste of time. Worse, 
> what he and Ben Thompson (below) say about privacy amounts to trolling.
> 
> How many comments did Robert get under that post? Hundreds? How many 
> man-days went into that thread, in sum? Did any of it move Robert — or any 
> anti-privacy person — off their position?
> 
> The anti-privacy crowd doesn't get it, and they aren't going to get it. 
> Worse, they produce nothing — especially for those they delight in 
> offending.
> 
> So I recommend not feeding them.
> 
> Doc
> 
> 
> 
> On Jun 19, 2014, at 11:22 PM, Don Marti 
> <
 >
>  wrote:
> 
>> begin 
>> 
 
>>  quotation of Fri, Jun 20, 2014 at 06:55:14AM +1000:
>> 
>>> The awful thing about the anti privacy brigade is that they seek to draw 
>>> the line for everyone else.  That's just not fair. 
>> 
>> another one...
>> 
>> Privacy is Dead
>> http://stratechery.com/2014/privacy-dead/
>> 
>> "The net result is an iron circle in which
>> advertisers pay free apps and sites, who in turn
>> provide significant benefit to consumers, who
>> in exchange surrender targeting info about their
>> demographics and preferences:
>> 
>> You cannot take away any one of these components
>> without taking away all of them. Unless we as a
>> society are willing to give up all of the benefits
>> provided by search, social networks, and the free
>> dissemination of information, then we will give up
>> our privacy."
>> 
>> It's hard to connect turning up the creepy to turning
>> up the value of ad-supported content, though.  As a
>> user, the more that I'm able to increase the cost
>> of surveilling me, the more cost-effective it is
>> to reach me by spending money on content instead.
>> The better that surveillance gets, the easier to
>> answer the question "what's the cheapiest, crappiest
>> content he would ever actually read?"
>> 
>> -- 
>> Don Marti                    
>> http://zgp.org/~dmarti/
>> 
 
>