There's no reason not to be able to opt out of stuff like this, and here's why:https://twitter.com/ByRosenberg/status/933058880828948480 …
-
Show this thread
-
First, the number of people who are directly harmed by this (e.g. those whose threat model approaches the Mossad model) are relatively small.
2 replies 0 retweets 13 likesShow this thread -
Second, the number of people who care enough to do so even when presented with full knowledge of what it is--or, to put it another way, those who would meet informed consent--is also relatively small compared to population use.
1 reply 1 retweet 10 likesShow this thread -
Therefore, the actual legitimate uses for these data (e.g. quality tracking and signal reliability mapping) are unlikely to be significantly derailed by those people opting out.
1 reply 1 retweet 14 likesShow this thread -
This is so often the case when it comes to the surveillance apparatuses we have on our devices. A statistically significant sample won't opt out even when given full explanation of what is happening and why.
1 reply 0 retweets 14 likesShow this thread -
This is why informed consent models should be adopted by tech companies. Empower the user to make an informed decision as to whether they're willing to surrender their data to improve quality. And then implement data safety and quality controls.
1 reply 10 retweets 29 likesShow this thread
This isn't even an open question. The ethical ground rules and cost-benefit frameworks for this are well-established and have been for decades.
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.