[HN Gopher] The Bulletproof Glass Effect: Unintended Consequence...
___________________________________________________________________
The Bulletproof Glass Effect: Unintended Consequences of Privacy
Notices
Author : behnamoh
Score : 18 points
Date : 2022-10-08 17:20 UTC (5 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (journals.sagepub.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (journals.sagepub.com)
| epicureanideal wrote:
| Startup idea: a policy policy provider with a set of standard
| terms, or pro version for more money where it evaluates and
| grades and verifies the absence of anything crazy or unexpected
| in a custom privacy policy.
| teeray wrote:
| Privacy Policies are as useless as cookie banners. Companies feed
| you page after page of confusing legalese so you give up and
| click "I accept." There should be a simplified plain-language
| form created by the FTC with checkboxes---check off any
| statements that are true about your company's privacy practices.
| Then they could be easily understood and compared.
| JadeNB wrote:
| You can probably guess at the meaning, but here's an excerpt from
| the abstract defining "the bulletproof-glass effect" and its
| relevance:
|
| > A privacy notice, by placing legally enforceable limits on a
| firm's data practices, communicating safeguards, and signaling
| transparency, might be expected to promote confidence that
| personal data will not be misused. Indeed, most managers expected
| a privacy notice to make customers feel more secure (Study 1).
| Yet, consistent with the analogy that bulletproof glass can
| increase feelings of vulnerability despite the protection
| offered, formal privacy notices undermined consumer trust and
| decreased purchase interest even when they emphasized objective
| protection (Studies 2, 3, and 5) or omitted any mention of
| potentially concerning data practices (Study 6).
| cassonmars wrote:
| There's a tremendous situational irony with the massive cookie
| notice at the bottom of the screen when this loads.
| abruzzi wrote:
| "we value your privacy" ... so here is how we are going to
| track you.
| ansgri wrote:
| At least they have "decline all" that works.
| matheusmoreira wrote:
| We value your privacy a lot. We make money off of it after
| all.
| Quarrel wrote:
| The actual paper courtesy of HBS:
|
| https://www.hbs.edu/ris/Publication%20Files/The%20Bulletproo...
| JadeNB wrote:
| I'm not sure why it's presented that way, but, while the page
| itself prompts me to "Get Access", I can just click the PDF
| overlay on the journal page to get the PDF:
| https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/pdf/10.1177/002224372110690...
| .
| thayne wrote:
| For a privacy policy to actually give me confidence in it
| protecting my privacy it would need to:
|
| 1. Be short enough that I can read it quickly (at most a couple
| minutes)
|
| 2. Be easily understandable
|
| 3. Actually have meaningful protections for my privacy
|
| Most privacy policies are none of those.
| ChrisMarshallNY wrote:
| How does this work for you?
|
| https://littlegreenviper.com/welcome-to-little-green-viper/p...
| phdelightful wrote:
| Not the parent, but I like it!
|
| First sentence is unnecessary.
|
| It would be better if it disallowed taking data for a legit
| reason and then using it for another less scrupulous reason.
| Point 5 may mitigate this concern substantially however.
| nobodyandproud wrote:
| Blame businesses.
|
| I see long winded policies as cover-your-ass for the business.
|
| The language and format isn't any different from EULAs and lends
| zero confidence because I have no way of verifying misbehavior,
| short of doing things like one-off email accounts.
|
| Not dissimilar to business whistle-blower "protection" and HR's
| mandatory "ethics" and other legal courses.
| MereInterest wrote:
| Something that wasn't mentioned in the abstract is whether the
| privacy policies were sufficient to actually protect somebody's
| privacy. It touches on there being no explicitly detrimental
| practices in the studies, but doesn't state whether they actually
| protect privacy, or merely codify existing business practices.
|
| To use their metaphor of bulletproof glass, suppose a company
| pointed a sheet of cardboard as a safety measure. Strictly
| speaking, a bullet will be moving slower after going through the
| cardboard, so it is t detrimental on its own. However, if a
| company lists it as a safety measure without listing anything
| else, I'd be more worried. Where before there was uncertainty
| about whether their practices were sufficient, after there was
| certainty that they are insufficient.
|
| In the same way, any privacy policy that includes "We only share
| your data with our trusted business partners." decreases my
| overall trust. Because that is already an admission of data
| changing hands, being used for further aggregation. Saying that
| you'll only share data about me when provided money in a business
| relationship is strictly better that sharing it publicly at all
| times, but isn't sufficient to give me any comfort.
| chatterhead wrote:
| Most things in this world are the opposite of what the say...
|
| The C.A.R.E.S. Act had nothing to do with caring. "Lifetime
| warranty" has a very specific meaning. "Organic" isn't what you
| think it means. Love. (Feel free to add your own interpretation
| on this one ;) )
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-10-08 23:01 UTC)