I filled in the barest minimum on each application and, since they would rather have me spending money with them than not, they passed the applications.
If they want to play silly games with the data afterwards, that keeps someone in work and I'm all for it.
-- Brian "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, but just because they are out to get you doesn't mean you have to make it easy for them."
As someone who prefers to make my own decisions, I'd rather *just* have an easily-navigable site than have someone else trying to figure out what I might/might not be interested in.
The problem with a system of registering customers' preferences is that you rule out, as a possible purchase, at least as much as you include.
Considered that?
-- Brian "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, but just because they are out to get you doesn't mean you have to make it easy for them."
But suppose you apply for a management job with Mr Tesco, and they narrow the field down to you and one other otherwise identical candidate, but they examine your purchase records and see that you buy two bottles of gin every week and Mr Otherwisely Identical doesn't. Who do you think they'll prefer to get the job, Mr Sober or Mr Alcoholic?
No it doesn't, but I did use the word *normally* in my original response. It doesn't mean I'm happy at having to register or give other than the most basic information to on-line suppliers.
I have to add, with the exception of Amazon who have generally always given me a first class service, I have not been particularly impressed with the general level of service of on-line suppliers.
Especially as it might be a case of Mr Sober (in this case) being the real alcoholic who lives next to Mr Alcoholic (who is really teetotal) but Mr Alcoholic nevertheless obligingly buys a couple of bottles of gin for his alcoholic neighbour called Mr Sober each week.
See, the whole statistical analysis thing from loyalty cards is a nonsense.
-- Brian "This isn't the longest day of the year: it just feels like it"
Quite so - but general cynicism about society today suggests that this is exactly the sort of judgement that *will* be made given the surfeit of information available; just take a look at recent events following
9/11, such as the attempted extradition of the Moroccan flight instructor to the US. Arab, check. Taught some bad people, check. Must be guilty. And of course profiling via computer data is much, much cheaper than doing it the proper oldfashioned investigative way. And to go back to the hypothetical example above, just how would you know that the company is using these records in such a manner?
Somewhere on snopes
formatting link
there is an interesting little tale about some kids who filled in some marketing babble with a false name under their real address to get extra free icecream in a promotion. A while later there came a letter addressed to the false name from the Government draft board, who'd been doing this sort of thing for years with information lists. Of course, when it went public there was much apologising, brou-houing, it shouldn't have happened, etc, but I suspect it was the tip of the iceberg.
What about the record of Mr Sober having purchased 'feminine items' with his weekly shop? Or the Barbie comic ? What sort of assumption would they make of that?
IMO, a record of you purchasing a Thomas train set would not be taken for granted that you model Sobor.
There was a report on TV of an Illinois businessman and several of his friends, all U.S. citizens of Arabic descent, who were arrested after
9/11 and imprisoned in solitary confinement in Chicago without being told what they were charged with, and without being allowed access to a lawyer or their families for something like 2 weeks. It turned out that one of them had been taking flying lessons, which had been paid for as a birthday present by the man's caucasian American father-in-law.
They were eventually released without charges being laid, and the state attorney-general actually made a public apology, but they received no recompense and are being encouraged (by lawyers, naturally) to sue the pants off the government.
Sure, but if I don't want to I don't even have to give a shop those details.
Giving just my name address and phone number seems a reasonable balance of benefit vs intrusion of privacy.
-- Brian "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, but just because they are out to get you doesn't mean you have to make it easy for them."
-- Brian "Just because you're paranoid doesn't mean they aren't out to get you, but just because they are out to get you doesn't mean you have to make it easy for them."
PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.