Charging MORE for Privacy is Better! (Says Comcast)

Tech and Science News: Charging MORE for Privacy is Better! (Says Comcast)

Yo! Are you down with the FCC? Well, Comcast isn't, because the FCC's been telling them they can't charge users more money if they want their private information to stay that way.

Binge Mode

More Tech and Science News

See All Tech and Science News Videos

Other Videos You'll Like

Comments (21)

  • DavidtheWavid FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    Comcast is proof that capitalism is dead. If it worked the way it's supposed to, they would've been out of business 10 years ago.


  • Forral FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Forral87

    1 year ago

    i really dont mind companies using data to tailor what i see online, it means im not getting bombarded with shitty ads that i have no interest in, such as horror movie trailers late at night or ads about how to solve poop problems while im eating dinner.

  • Outis FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Non Mea Culpa

    1 year ago

    I really am curious about how Rooster Teeth uses our data. I have to assume that they have given data to Fullscreen for marketing analysis, and Fullscreen seems to follow the internet standard of monetizing data to the fullest extent possible. While RT just gathers data you explicitly give, like demographic and payment info, along with IP logs, FS combines that with hardware information, data from 3rd party partners, and (if you link it) seems to scrape data from your Facebook profile. They also appear to use three different ad (and tracking) partners. Finally, they do not say that they won't sell user information to third parties, which, while it is getting harder to argue, can be used by them as justification for selling data. Again, this is fairly standard, even if it seems aggressive to the lay-person, but the big issue is that there's no sense of how they use data from their affiliates. The only thing they say is that "we may share your Information with companies with whom Fullscreen is affiliated or related to ..., and will require such affiliated or related companies to use the Information solely in accordance with this Policy," which obviously only covers data which goes out from FS.


    (I want to take a moment to point out how creepy it is that they are very clear that all user data is stored in a country that is 1) NOT the country the user is in, 2) NOT in the European Economic Area (basically, the EU), and, 3) "in particular," NOT the United States.)


    The privacy policy for RoosterTeeth.com states that it "does not sell personal information about its members to any third party," and "will not share any individual personal information" except for when compelled to by law, or in the event of the company being sold. Demographic data is shared to sponsors, but nothing identifiable. The policy was last updated in Dec 2012, so it's not impossible that it was superseded in the sale to Fullscreen, but RT would be breaching their policy if any change was not announced: "RoosterTeeth.com will update this Privacy Policy from time to time and alert users of the changes via the RoosterTeeth.com online forum or alert system." Given the very careful, power-granting wording of the FS privacy policy, and the very informal, power-cedeing wording of the RT privacy policy, I'm surprised that an update has not been handed down from on high in the past year and a half. However, this may simply be a reflection of the independent status of Rooster Teeth in the Fullscreen organization.


    Care to comment on the matter, @gus? Actually, who at the company would even be in the best position to comment on it? @matt makes sense, but I doubt the CEO would have his hands on a matter like this. @Adam might know, since he'd have a better idea of the actual data flow as director of technology. Hell, maybe it would be @Abdine, since if data was being sold now, he would be in charge of it.


    TL;DR: RT said they do not sell data, but FS has made no promise to that effect. RT's Privacy Policy is 4 years old, so it's possible things changed after being bought by FS.


    I'm really not sure why I just spent the past hour working on this instead of my thesis, especially since I doubt anyone will see it, but hot damn this wasn't far more interesting than reading journal articles. And to be fair, I doubt anyone will see my thesis either.

  • Kevin_01 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold RT Sponsor

    1 year ago

    Holyshit the cyberpunk is strong in this one.


    At this rate, the know will report next week that sleep has been copyrighted or something

  • ReckonBallZ FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Watcher on the 4th Wall

    1 year ago

    Image searches (on Google) for Comcast are still funny.

  • MartyGras2 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I'm not surprised. There is to be money to be made in selling people's information and companies love making money.

  • Gumi.Rokkaku FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    No no no, ya got it all wrong.
    They're not charging for privacy, they're lowering rates for less privacy.
    There's totally a difference

    /s

  • rllebron

    1 year ago

    Services already offer this type of thing already. Hulu, Youtube, Netflix (in a way), Crunchyroll, Amazon (with prime services again in a way), even Rooster Teeth, by offering ad-free services for a premium price. This is exactly what AT&T is supposedly doing and this is what Comcast wants to do as well to keep their promo pricing down. Is it shitty? of course it is, but if people don't want ads directed at them, they'll either pay for the premium service or get an ad block, but either way the non-sensitive data is still being collected and sent to ad targeting services. As long as my sensitive data still remains to be kept private and not sold, I really don't care if they take my browsing history and search terms to direct ads at me. If they want to suggest weird fetish porn I'm obsessed with, what clothes sites i normally go to that have sales, and whatever else at me, I say have at it. I have ad block for a reason. Companies are going to make money in whatever way possible. If a definite ad free internet is their way of doing so, then those people who want to buy because they're paranoid of their non-sensitive data being sold to ad targeting services are the people they are interested in.

  • JosephKratze

    1 year ago

    SITREP: Comcast is still the devil...

  • resistorserv FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Toaster Repair Pony

    1 year ago

    It very easy to see how much of my data is sold because I use this site all the time and any other website I use just has Rooster Teeth ads on them.

    • Blue_Whale FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      So I'm not the only one...

  • Teshiku FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I have two questions in regards to this:


    One- Wasn't the point of the Net Neutrality thing that internet access is a utility and should be treated as such?


    Two- Is there anything restricting water/electric/telephone companies from selling the information on individual household usage (such as water/electric usage to Kenmore or Sears for advertisements on lower usage appliances)?

    • senox13

      1 year ago

      I can answer one. Yes, but this does not affect a customer's access to data or the speed at which they get it, nor does it preference any particular domains.

  • Cole5 FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Sir Cole!

    1 year ago

    Why can someme hit them with an anti trust lawsuit and fragment them?

  • shmanel FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    Wow, Ashley really nailed the "wat" line

  • 13ullseye FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold Idiot Savant

    1 year ago

    Cuntcast, at its finest.

  • Phatnaru FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    Great! I work for ComCast. The last thing we need is for the higher ups to make another decision that's just gonna make customers more angry at us. The thing that sucks about it is that customers take it out on us as if we were part of the decision in the slightest. Guess I can look forward to a couple months of people asking me why I personally am robbing them and stealing their data. F***ing Great!

    • rllebron

      1 year ago

      I used to work for comcast up until a couple months ago, you'll with a genius email about how to handle those calls along with an einstein document. The only people who will care will be the paranoid ones. Remember the whole thing about us buying TWC? I literally had no calls about it whatsoever and never had a customer comment on it in the slightest. They only cared about getting their services working and wondering where their tech was. It was a normal day for me during that whole thing.

    • Phatnaru FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

      1 year ago

      Its cool to meet someone that worked there. Where do you work now? I'm trying so hard to break away from the Comcast branch right now. The company itself is a good employer, but the customer... U

  • IsnerPR IsnerPR

    1 year ago

    Sadly, this is probably the future. So many people in this generation have the mentality that, "if I don't do anything wrong, I have no reason to hide or have privacy." Unfortunately, I'm sure in the next 20-30 years you'll have to pay a pretty decent fee to opt-out of selling your info.

  • Vieve FIRST Member Star(s) Indication of membership status - One star is a FIRST member, two stars is Double Gold

    1 year ago

    I knew RT was selling all my data. Thanks for the confirmation Gus.