Skip to main content

The porn you once watched


I asked Mayer if he believed there was reason to worry that one’s porn-browsing history could be sold — say, to a potential employer — or made public. “I’m not aware of any company intentionally doing either,” he said. “But it’s just one rogue employee or data breach away.” The recent revelation that the NSA spied on Muslim “radicals’” porn-viewing habits with the plan of using that information to discredit them makes the threat seem all that more real. “The NSA gets most of its data from private companies. They’re the start of the surveillance supply chain,” said Downey. “It might start with quote-unquote radicals, but it could go to any one of us.”
So should you worry about your porn being tracked? Yes. There is plenty of reason for concern. But remember that ad trackers aren’t just on porn sites — they’re on social networks, financial websites, medical forums, you name it. In fact, an Abine study found that porn sites had fewer trackers than almost any other category of site. As one privacy analyst put it to me, focusing on porn tracking minimizes the problem. What you watch on YouJizz is the very least of it. (“Who’s tracking your porn?,” Tracy Clark-Flory, Salon.com)
- - - - -
KPinSEA


"The piece went on to report that the details of one’s visit to a porn site “could be incorporated into the vast dossiers that internet, advertising and data companies create about individuals, and are used to tailor the ads and content people see.”"
What undiscovered tribe in the Amazon didn't know this already?

It still matters when we decide to float this up as a matter of public consideration. We all know that visits to porn sites could be used to down an awful lot of people. Dave Eggers' "The Circle" had as part of its plot the mass downing of disfavored politicians by a reveal of this sort of tracking data. It could be that we're focusing on this possibility — the easy ruin of almost anyone in America, instantly—as preamble, as a laying out, for the next incarnation and character of Occupy. 
Eggers' version, though, was of most people favoring the reveal, as they were all members of the same unity — the Circle — not those fearing being spied out by investigators. If we all somehow develop into such a unity and all our past "sins" are excused by being part of a time when we were different people — still yet unclean — with a different relation to the state, we might actually approve all the tracking, and want more of it to target those who must hate, hate, hate the nation so much to find so much wrong with it. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Discussion over the fate of Jolenta, at the Gene Wolfe facebook appreciation site

Patrick McEvoy-Halston November 28 at 10:36 AM Why does Severian make almost no effort to develop sustained empathy for Jolenta -- no interest in her roots, what made her who she was -- even as she features so much in the first part of the narrative? Her fate at the end is one sustained gross happenstance after another... Severian has repeated sex with her while she lay half drugged, an act he argues later he imagines she wanted -- even as he admits it could appear to some, bald "rape" -- but which certainly followed his  discussion of her as someone whom he could hate so much it invited his desire to destroy her; Severian abandons her to Dr. Talus, who had threatened to kill her if she insisted on clinging to him; Baldanders robs her of her money; she's sucked at by blood bats, and, finally, left at death revealed discombobulated of all beauty... a hunk of junk, like that the Saltus citizens keep heaped away from their village for it ruining their preferred sense ...

Salon discussion of "Almost Famous" gang-rape scene

Patrick McEvoy-Halston: The "Almost Famous'" gang-rape scene? Isn't this the film that features the deflowering of a virgin -- out of boredom -- by a pack of predator-vixons, who otherwise thought so little of him they were quite willing to pee in his near vicinity? Maybe we'll come to conclude that "[t]he scene only works because people were stupid about [boy by girl] [. . .] rape at the time" (Amy Benfer). Sawmonkey: Lucky boy Pull that stick a few more inches out of your chute, Patrick. This was one of the best flicks of the decade. (sawmonkey, response to post, “Films of the decade: ‘Amost Famous’, R.J. Culter, Salon, 13 Dec. 2009) Patrick McEvoy-Halston: @sawmonkey It made an impression on me too. Great charm. Great friends. But it is one of the things you (or at least I) notice on the review, there is the SUGGESTION, with him being so (rightly) upset with the girls feeling so free to pee right before him, that sex with him is just further presump...

The Conjuring

The Conjuring 
I don't know if contemporary filmmakers are aware of it, but if they decide to set their films in the '70s, some of the affordments of that time are going to make them have to work harder to simply get a good scare from us. Who would you expect to have a more tenacious hold on that house, for example? The ghosts from Salem, or us from 2013, who've just been shown a New England home just a notch or two downscaled from being a Jeffersonian estate, that a single-income truck driver with some savings can afford? Seriously, though it's easy to credit that the father — Roger Perron—would get his family out of that house as fast as he could when trouble really stirs, we'd be more apt to still be wagering our losses—one dead dog, a wife accumulating bruises, some good scares to our kids—against what we might yet have full claim to. The losses will get their nursing—even the heavy traumas, maybe—if out of this we've still got a house—really,...