I don't believe that people are generally against the collection and use of personal information, per se. To me, the problem lies in a couple key areas, which coincide pretty well with Cook's statement:
1) No opt-out. Some companies and institutions are decent about this, but the overwhelming majority of companies who are collecting information about me I've never heard of and couldn't name. I'm not asked if tracking, etc. is okay, OR am presented with some dense glacier of legalese when my only interest is to read some article.
2) No transparency. Who has what information about me and how are they using it? I haven't the foggiest clue, if I'm being honest about it, and I'm a relatively technologically sophisticated and aware user.
3) No deletes. Even when a company offers to "delete your data", how can this be verified complete? It is difficult for me to trust a company or institution's word on this having so insidiously collected the data in the first place. Now, before you take issue with "insidiously", consider the information asymmetry present when an average person (non-lawyer/engineer superstar hybrid) signs up for FB or Gmail. There is definitely a sense in which it is clear that you aren't getting something for nothing, but at 16 that didn't occur to me, and now the damage is done.
4) What, precisely, is this data going to be used for? Creepy ads are one thing, and have been pervasive enough long enough that I think many folks see they as normal now. I don't like the advertising economy, and take steps to shield myself and my family from it to the degree that is possible within our inconvenience tolerances, but the scary thing about this data goes beyond shitty frothing-mouth marketing efforts. When the advertisers are done with it (hah!) it is still there, waiting to be exploited in a political, judicial, or military effort of some kind. Google "Sesame Credit" for info on China's bone-chilling weaponization of social media. And yes, I know, China isn't a beacon of human rights, that isn't the point. I suspect that if China can do this out in the open, there are closed doors in DC behind which a more subtle, similar effort is at least an on-again/off-again discussion.
So no, I can't agree with you that "whatever hypothetical problem that could result from such collection of data could be solved more efficiently in a different way". I work at a 2nd tier retailer whose "Customer 360 Experience" is a surveillance program a lesser nation state would be envious of (I was very surprised to learn how much collection efforts have evolved for in brick and mortar stores). Once the data is collected, it's damned near impossible to "uncollect". Genies don't like to go back into their bottles.
5) your data is sold or shared with a third party and they leak it, ex Equifax so you have a lot to lose when your data is leaked (imagine if all our browser history would be collected for years and then somehow leaked, that would suck a lot, probably lives would be destroyed)
1) No opt-out. Some companies and institutions are decent about this, but the overwhelming majority of companies who are collecting information about me I've never heard of and couldn't name. I'm not asked if tracking, etc. is okay, OR am presented with some dense glacier of legalese when my only interest is to read some article.
2) No transparency. Who has what information about me and how are they using it? I haven't the foggiest clue, if I'm being honest about it, and I'm a relatively technologically sophisticated and aware user.
3) No deletes. Even when a company offers to "delete your data", how can this be verified complete? It is difficult for me to trust a company or institution's word on this having so insidiously collected the data in the first place. Now, before you take issue with "insidiously", consider the information asymmetry present when an average person (non-lawyer/engineer superstar hybrid) signs up for FB or Gmail. There is definitely a sense in which it is clear that you aren't getting something for nothing, but at 16 that didn't occur to me, and now the damage is done.
4) What, precisely, is this data going to be used for? Creepy ads are one thing, and have been pervasive enough long enough that I think many folks see they as normal now. I don't like the advertising economy, and take steps to shield myself and my family from it to the degree that is possible within our inconvenience tolerances, but the scary thing about this data goes beyond shitty frothing-mouth marketing efforts. When the advertisers are done with it (hah!) it is still there, waiting to be exploited in a political, judicial, or military effort of some kind. Google "Sesame Credit" for info on China's bone-chilling weaponization of social media. And yes, I know, China isn't a beacon of human rights, that isn't the point. I suspect that if China can do this out in the open, there are closed doors in DC behind which a more subtle, similar effort is at least an on-again/off-again discussion.
So no, I can't agree with you that "whatever hypothetical problem that could result from such collection of data could be solved more efficiently in a different way". I work at a 2nd tier retailer whose "Customer 360 Experience" is a surveillance program a lesser nation state would be envious of (I was very surprised to learn how much collection efforts have evolved for in brick and mortar stores). Once the data is collected, it's damned near impossible to "uncollect". Genies don't like to go back into their bottles.