"Collecting data not only from PCs or mobile phones but also from various home appliances ... will lead to a new digital innovation"
Nope, not from a tech company's marketing copy but from a *scientific* paper on personalized advertising 🙄 mdpi.com/2078-2489/12/1…
"psychological factors ... can be utilized to enhance existing personalization models ... Inferring the psychological characteristics of users and inserting them as input variables into a personalization model could significantly improve the results"
"personalized advertisement systems should not only collect… context-related attributes of the user (profile, history, social, time, location, connected devices, etc.) but also combine them with psychological factors that can positively affect the attitude towards ad acceptance"
"it is recommended to utilize the advertisers’ related information, such as check-ins, reviews, and every piece of available information, if possible"
"many sources in the web that can be used to obtain useful data exist (e.g., Social Media data, Google, etc.)"
...EU funded 🙄
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
In 2019, the UK data protection authority found that surveillance advertising is illegal at scale & millions are affected by GDPR violations myriads of companies commit every day. Now the regulator 'reinforces the need to address the concerns'. I mean #wtf ico.org.uk/media/about-th…
The 2019 report was very good, and today's 'opinion' once again contains a sharp analysis of massive non-compliance, which the ICO 'continues to see evidence of', including 'invalid consent', 'unlawful' data processing, and it's not even clear by whom.
But NOTHING happens!
"The Commissioner called for industry to make changes, but also recognised the need for a measured and considered approach due to… a commercially sensitive ecosystem"
Bullshit. The ICO undermines compliance, destroys trust into the GDPR and into information technology at large.
"Für FinTechs, InsurTechs, Plattformen, NeoBroker ... soll Deutschland einer der führenden Standorte … Es gilt, die mit den neuen Technologien, wie z. B. Blockchain, verbundenen Chancen zu nutzen" … "neue Dynamik … Finanzinnovationen, Kryptoassets und Geschäftsmodellen"
Puh.
Das Problem is nicht mal so sehr das sinnleere BS-Bingo, sondern dass hier ein breites Feld digitaler Geschäftsmodelle mit potenziell gewaltigen gesellschaftlichen Auswirkungen ("Fintech", "Insurtech") zum Nebenschauplatz von mehr oder weniger zwielichtigem Trading-Zeug verkommt.
Wenn wir das, was aktuell unter "Fintech" und "Insurtech" gehandelt wird, nicht aktiv gesellschaftlich gestalten, bzw. wenn uns dazu nicht mehr einfällt als "wir brauchen eine neue Dynamik" und "effektive und zügige Genehmigungsverfahren", dann wird das ein Desaster mit Anlauf.
Excellent article on RTB in digital advertising, one of the "most significant sources of online behaviour surveillance", its non-legality in the EU, non-enforcement by data protection authorities, plus a review of approaches to strategic litigation from non-profit to for-profit.
"While exactly how real-time bidding works and its sheer scale are no secret, its complexity and the multiplicity of stakeholders involved are certainly
opaque"
A major reason "for the failure of regulatory enforcement to date can be found in the one-stop-shop mechanism ... countless examples confirm the criticism that US corporations deliberately use the one-stop-shop mechanism for forum shopping"
The DPC's draft decision about the 2018 NOYB complaint against FB largely reads like Facebook defending itself against the complaint.
Even without considering off-platform data, FB processes personal data on hundreds of millions of Europeans at an EXTREME scale/depth/velocity.
The decision argues this the 'very nature' of FB's service and can thus be part of a 'contract' with the user. noyb.eu/sites/default/…
(actually, as far as I can see, the investigation of Facebook's personal data processing activities and in-depth legal assessments of each of those data processing activities was not part of the investigation that led to the draft decision)
Highly relevant study on how 24,000 out of 570k identified free Android and iOS apps transmit personal data to third-party companies shows a massive failure of GDPR enforcement. By @KKollnig, Anastasia Shuba, @RDBinns et al, based on code+traffic analysis: arxiv.org/pdf/2109.13722…
@KKollnig@RDBinns Examining also iOS apps is very worthy. Third-party tracking in iOS apps is notoriously underexamined because more difficult than in the Google ecosystem.
However, important to consider that the data is from 2020, and thus from *before* Apple introduced the IDFA request stuff.
The 'Advertising ID' is a device identifier controlled by Google/Apple that points to the person using a phone. Thousands of companies use it to track, follow and profile everyone.
55.4% of Android apps and 31% of iOS apps shared the so-called Advertising ID with third parties.
"Eine neue Studie zeigt, wie Digitalisierung ganze Arbeitsprozesse reorganisiert und zu immer mehr Kontrolle führt"
@shroombab über rigide digitale Kontrolle im Außendienst, Überwachung mit Microsoft 365 & Socialcredit-Bewertungssysteme in der Büroarbeit: futurezone.at/netzpolitik/mi…
@shroombab Hier ein Überblick über das erwähnte Fallbeispiel aus AT, das auf Basis von Interviews mit BetriebsrätInnen eindrücklich zeigt, wie das Smartphone durch digitale Dokumentation und Vorgabe von Arbeitsschritten die Wartung von Anlagen verändert hat.
Besonders perfide: Die Kundenfirmen, die die Anlagen betreiben, wollen immer mehr Daten über durchgeführte Wartungstätigkeiten. Ein Wartungsbetrieb bietet nun Echtzeit-Zugriff auf Daten der WartungsmitarbeiterInnen als Zusatzdienst.