I don't think their consent is an outlier. Most users are somewhat ok with selling their data in exchange for free services. I mean I use Gmail, Google Search, Google Maps, etc. etc. knowing they hoover up my data because, in the end, I value the ability to have these services for free more than I care about Google's ability to collect useful statistics about me/its users.
> Most users are somewhat ok with selling their data in exchange for free services.
I think you're incorrect. I think most users recognize that they usually don't have a choice: they don't have money to provide for services that they need, so they are _forced_ to use services that are cheaper or free. And I think most users feel helpless to do anything about it because most politicians actively ignore them (because they're poor) or work against them (because not-poor businesses pay politicians), and also because most businesses providing free service do not provide any useful mechanism for human interaction. Ever have trouble with a free service? Your only recourse is to go on social media and complain and hope to catch enough public attention such that someone who works at the company will reply. And even then you're not guaranteed a resolution to your issue.
There's plenty of similarly priced alternatives out there that aren't as abusive as the big ad companies.
The problem isn't just that poor people are money poor. It's that they're also time poor. They're too busy making ends meet to care about this stuff. That Google collects so much of their data would probably not even be on their list of things to care about.
I think you're underestimating the average non-tech oriented user that simply uses. A lot of those considerations might be true for users conscious about data collection, but I'd imagine that's a very small subset of users.
> I think you're underestimating the average non-tech oriented user that simply uses.
While I certainly think it's possible, it doesn't echo with my personal anecdotes of friends and family. They all fit in with "I don't want to be tracked but I'm helpless to stop it!" crowd. All of my family, most of my friends.
> As a user who understands and consents to that request
They can't really consent, because no-one truly understands what it is that they are agreeing to. It is simply not possible to have informed consent about the use, re-sale, re-combination, re-identification, long-term storage, profiling, credit/employment/health/housing impacts, etc. It's not possible to consent because you can't tell what you are giving away about other people who you aren't aware that you're impacting, and don't have their permission to do so. There just isn't any way for someone to say 'I understand and consent' and have it be meaningful.
I do agree that this is probably the bigger issue. A lack of understanding of what exactly you are agreeing to. If that is solved, however, then a continual request for consent would be a non-starter for any service use, making the whole point moot.
Maybe you do, but the vast majority of people do not. In that respect you definitely are an outlier.
Most people don't understand the value that comes from user data, and the potentially damaging effects it might have on their life (Facebook can detect that you are homosexual through your Facebook usage, and if you live in a country where they kill homosexuals you are going to be in serious trouble). Almost no users understand the impact of the third-party doctrine.
There are all sorts of other issues. If you talk to someone suspected of being a terrorist, then you are labeled as a suspected terrorist. Since this bill is about browsing data, if you read articles If you read articles that are seen as being objectionable (imagine reading articles about communism during McCarthyism) then you might be labeled as such even if you were reading them for purposes other than indoctrination. There is a reason that a court order is required to get the borrowing records of a particular library user and libraries cannot sell that information.
> I'm pretty confident that I understand what i'm agreeing to.
Ok, let's explore that. Can you describe, completely, what it is that you are agreeing to? And just so we are speaking at the same level "I agree that you can do anything you want" isn't a meaningful consent.
I consent to my location data being tracked, to the extent that I don't turn it off. Sometimes I choose to, but usually I don't. I consent to Google scanning my email to serve me relevant ads and provide useful information to me about arriving packages and the like. I consent to them monitoring my search habits, to the extent that I choose not to use incognito mode, in order to populate my Google Now feed and again, better target ads to me. I could go on enumerating more things for more companies, but I think you get the point.
There was a time where people willingly consented to being sold as slaves. Did they truly understand? Or was the circumstances "forced" upon it due to having no other options?
If you had to consent for the use of an incredibly popular app, is it really understanding? Or is it capitulation disguised?
> There was a time where people willingly consented to being sold as slaves.
I'm not going to categorically say that that's false, but I find that somewhat hard to believe, except under very contrived circumstances that could hardly be called 'willing' (e.g. "we'll kill your family if you don't"). Do you have a citation for that?
> Most users are somewhat ok with selling their data in exchange for free services.
I'm far from convinced that this is true. Most users don't actually know the extent to which their data is being collected. I suspect that a large percentage of people, if they were informed (and believed it), would object mightily.
I think it's far more likely that people don't want to know. By now I think most people are aware that their privacy is being violated, but feel powerless to do anything and don't want to resist the temptations of using addictive social media etc. They pity themselves for it, and try to ignore that it's a problem.
I agree partly with you but I don't think most users know the extend of information collected from those services, if people saw their profiles as really used by google I believe almost all of them would freak out.
