Jump to content
SASS Wire Forum

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Aunt Jen

Data Collection on Us that We Can't Learn About

Recommended Posts

This concern is not new with me, but try as I might, I cannot learn much about these things:

 

1. Automobiles, datametrics, the car emitting by EM wave to whomever via whatever Internet pathway (cell data or wifi when available) data about the car, its location....or its ability to receive EM signals and respond. Senator Al Franken was also curious http://www.computerworld.com/article/2487765/mobile-wireless/ford-exec-says-automaker-doesn-t-collect-or-share-car-location-data.htmli had not long ago a mechanic give me info on tbis that bithered me. it seems to me that if I own the car, I should be able to learn what all it can do.

 

2. Smart phones. I'm not concerned about law enforcement knowing my location. The FBI has had a file on me since I was 17. They've got more on me than they probably want. (Was NSA in the Navy.). What I don't like is the way phones can send data to cloud without indicating that they're doing so. I have an old operating system in mine, and like it because it's not very smart. But I wonder about such as iPhone 6s that may send unknown or all such things as photos on the phone to COMPANIES such as Apple who package data for sale to dataminers, multibillion dollar business, by contracts. Grow the acquired database, grow the data sakes. I know one can "turn off" cloud finctions they can find, but that limits using the service, NOT necessarily disabling the cloud finctions, same for such ad OnStar. My little experiments with an IOS 5 and 2 scanners showed cloud functions were operative and immediate, whether or not cloud turned off.

 

3. Medical records. My exper in forensics social work morphed into medical social work long ago. I know %#&@ on doctors very few would admit to. (I value good docs more because of bad ones also in the system.) I know, for example. Patients CANNOT learn what is in their own record. HIPAA doesn't help because docs can summarize and (de facto) sanitize, and I've known them to outright lie. Much more involved, but I'm on a phone, typing w my thumb. :) We should be able to log on like our bank and see all the original data on us. Sone of it is wrong or irrelevant, and we can't find out about except when sometimes a doc reveals.

 

I know privacy is "dead."

 

But why?

 

Basically all data on all of us is siphoned away. We cannot learn about much of it, who has it, what they do with it.

 

We have the vote. Why don't we enable ourselves to learn about it, to limit it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jen:

 

The proverbial cat is out of the bag when it comes to trying to retroactively stop the sharing of personal data...but so what?

 

Most data collection is related to buying patterns, marketing, advertising, consumer patterns, etc, and you could really care less if Madison Ave. thinks, on the basis of your purchases, that you would prefer Tide to All. Forget about it.

 

As for your comments re medical records, I suspect that there is some variation in systems depending upon the provider. I happen to be part of a medical care system that closely guards the confidentiality of my records, but also utilizes an electronic records system that not only allows me to directly view my records and doctors notes on-line, but also allows me to comment or add my own notes, as well as carry on a running private e-mail conversation with my docs. No complaints, no breaches (fingers crossed), good communication.

 

Overall, I think the media has stirred the "privacy" pot for its own profit. I'm more concerned with misuse of data by the IRS (which is a reflection of the lack of moral fiber of the people, not the size of their cloud) than I am with the collection of data by my car or cellphone.

 

What really drives me nuts are the folks who live on Facebook or other social media, exposing the intimate details of their lives, and then wringing their hands when someone "penetrates" the system. If you want to limit the intrusion, don't put it out there in the first place.

 

LL

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jen:

 

The proverbial cat is out of the bag when it comes to trying to retroactively stop the sharing of personal data...but so what?

 

 

What really drives me nuts are the folks who live on Facebook or other social media, exposing the intimate details of their lives, and then wringing their hands when someone "penetrates" the system. If you want to limit the intrusion, don't put it out there in the first place.

 

LL

 

Bingo!!

 

Blackfoot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have a friend that is terminally ill. My only communication with her is facebook. I have no desire for any other communication with the myriads of people that are daily spilling their guts on facebook.

Now that I have communicated a few times with her I wonder is there any way to block the dozens of "MMMMMMMM has updated a photo on facebook" that appears on my computer daily?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jen:

 

The proverbial cat is out of the bag when it comes to trying to retroactively stop the sharing of personal data...but so what?

 

Most data collection is related to buying patterns, marketing, advertising, consumer patterns, etc, and you could really care less if Madison Ave. thinks, on the basis of your purchases, that you would prefer Tide to All. Forget about it.

 

As for your comments re medical records, I suspect that there is some variation in systems depending upon the provider. I happen to be part of a medical care system that closely guards the confidentiality of my records, but also utilizes an electronic records system that not only allows me to directly view my records and doctors notes on-line, but also allows me to comment or add my own notes, as well as carry on a running private e-mail conversation with my docs. No complaints, no breaches (fingers crossed), good communication.

 

Overall, I think the media has stirred the "privacy" pot for its own profit. I'm more concerned with misuse of data by the IRS (which is a reflection of the lack of moral fiber of the people, not the size of their cloud) than I am with the collection of data by my car or cellphone.

 

What really drives me nuts are the folks who live on Facebook or other social media, exposing the intimate details of their lives, and then wringing their hands when someone "penetrates" the system. If you want to limit the intrusion, don't put it out there in the first place.

 

LL

 

Well, I don't have any Facebook account, etc., and while your concerns are well related and I generally agree with them, I've been involved in private advocacy with minority groups for decades.

 

Problems some people with minority issues face are not of concern to many in the majority, and when data is placed into such as medical records, sometimes private info on the person that is not relevant to their health is placed into the record, and sometimes I've learned of it being used as gossip among medical staff. (Yes.) As in my O.P.---I've seen a lot of it. The idealistic "this is your medical record so we can treat you efficiently or if you're incapacitated" falls to the side when medical staff use unnecessary private info, and in most cases the patent is simply never allowed to see his own medial records. Some doctor's offices will use a third-party, internet company that will collect patient data for patients to log onto, and that has 2 problems (1) that means the doc's office has just given the patient's info to a company on the internet, likely with a chain of waivers signed that allow patient-unaware data mining, marketing..., and (2) that info put there is NOT the patient's actual medical record for the patient to see, that I've been mentioning. It's what the doc's office chose to share. I beleive the patient should be able to log into the exact same system the doctors use and see their records, as like unto the patient with her bank.

 

My thinking on medical records or all info sharing is that a person should be able to OPT OUT and accept the consequences.

 

In the case of stuff from a phone, then the person would agree to not have their photos put on their other devices without a little effort. Big loss.

 

In the case of automobile data streaming/internet connections/gps tracking/reception of instructional signals, then the owner would opt out of being able to use the internet while driving, being tracked.... (contrary to what many people are being led to believe, GPS does NOT need a two-way connection to any GPS satellite or MAP to work. GPSs can have city maps in their onboard database, a chip, and don't need to have an intermittent internet connection to work or update. And to function for the owner's location, all the GPS device needs to do is RECEIVE data from the satellites, not transmit. I'm a pilot and boater. And most of my GPSs function as stand-lone devices, receiving, teling me where I am, etc., with a moving map on them that shows me the path to my destination... No problem. Being able to update on the fly opens intrusive doors and is unnecessary. I think an owner should be able to opt out of an internet connection.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I should say pilot, boater, and car/bike driver.... I put about 25-30,000 miles a year on vehicles. So I'm using road maps on internal chips/databses all the time, never updating.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.