• 0 Posts
  • 27 Comments
Joined 2 years ago
Cake day: July 30th, 2023
  • tomatolung@sopuli.xyztoUplifting News@lemmy.world•Oregon launches statewide recycling systemEnglish
    5·
    3 days ago

    …

    Local and out-of-state businesses with global revenues of $5 million or more will need to pay those producer fees to help pay for recycling services, like helping local hauling companies purchase new trucks and recycling bins. Funds will also help local governments administer the program and educate ratepayers about what is or isn’t recyclable.

    This new recycling system came out of legislation passed in 2021. That law was a response to a global recycling disruption that began in 2017, when China — the world’s largest importer of recyclables — stopped accepting several types of waste due to high levels of contamination.

    Since then, more domestic companies have cropped up to fulfill the nation’s demand for a place to recycle their trash, particularly plastics — according to Kim Holmes, executive director of Circular Action Alliance, the nonprofit charged with collecting and administering producer fees.

    “There is no struggle in finding end markets,” Holmes said. “We have homes for all of the materials we currently have.”

    The law requires recyclables to go to “responsible end markets” — that is, businesses that recycle materials in a way that doesn’t have major environmental or public health consequences. The statewide recycling list is based on materials that have such end markets.

  • tomatolung@sopuli.xyztoPrivacy@lemmy.ml•Privacy is a team sport - how do we get more people to play?
    2·
    2 months ago

    I like this concept and I feel like that a step along the way as it is essentially what’s happening. The EULA’s, TOS’s, SLA’s, etc are all contracts, which should be negotiable by both parties and allow the individuals or groups to define value, be that monetary value (the $5) or something in trade. Some how we the masses skipped over the negotiation, and are left with an almost binary choice either accept and use it or not. (You could sue, or protest, or etc, but without standing or a large following this is not effective for an individual.)

    So whilst’ I agree, I also think it might be more useful to focus on the reason the information is valuable.

  • tomatolung@sopuli.xyztoPrivacy@lemmy.ml•Privacy is a team sport - how do we get more people to play?
    3·
    2 months ago

    And one last point here, is that these all stem from the way we as humans are built. Although we are capable of rational though, we often do not make rational decisions. Indeed those decisions are based on cognitive biases which we all have and are effected by context, environment, input, etc. It’s possible to overcome this lack of rational judgement, through processes and synthesis such as the scientific method. So we as citizens and humans can build institutions that help us account for the individual biases we have and overcome these biological challenges, while also enjoying the benefits and remaining human.

  • tomatolung@sopuli.xyztoPrivacy@lemmy.ml•Privacy is a team sport - how do we get more people to play?
    6·
    2 months ago

    Great cause and one that reaches to the heart of what I see as impacting much of the governmental and societal disruption that’s happening. It’s a complex and nuanced issue that is likely to take multiple prongs and a long time to resolve.

    Let me start by again generally agreeing with the point. Privacy is necessary for reasons beyond the obvious needs. Speaking to the choir here on a privacy community. I think it’s worth listing the reasons that I understand why Americans are generally dismissive of the need for privacy protections. I cheated here, and used an LLM to help, but I think these points are indicative of things to overcome.

    • Convenience > confidentiality. Nearly half of U.S. adults (47 %) say it’s acceptable for retailers to track every purchase in exchange for loyalty-card discounts, illustrating a widespread “deal first, data later” mindset. Pew Research Center

    • “Nothing to hide.” A popular refrain equates privacy with secrecy; if you’re law-abiding, the thinking goes, surveillance is harmless. The slogan is so common that rights groups still publish rebuttals to it. Amnesty International

    • Resignation and powerlessness. About 73 % feel they have little or no control over what companies do with their data, and 79 % say the same about government use—attitudes that breed fatalism rather than action. Pew Research Center

    • Policy-fatigue & click-through consent. Because privacy policies are dense and technical, 56 % of Americans routinely click “agree” without reading, while 69 % treat the notice as a hurdle to get past, not a safeguard. Pew Research Center

    • The privacy paradox. Behavioral studies keep finding a gap between high stated concern and lax real-world practice, driven by cognitive biases and social desirability effects. SAGE Journals

    • Market ideology & the “free-service” bargain. The U.S. tech economy normalizes “free” platforms funded by targeted ads; many users see data sharing as the implicit cost of innovation and participation. LinkedIn

    • Security framing. Post-9/11 narratives cast surveillance as a safety tool; even today 42 % still approve of bulk data collection for anti-terrorism, muting opposition to broader privacy safeguards. Pew Research Center

    • Harms feel abstract. People worry about privacy in the abstract, yet most haven’t suffered visible damage, so the risk seems remote compared with daily conveniences. IAPP

    • Patchwork laws. With no single federal statute, Americans face a confusing mix of state and sector rules, making privacy protections feel inconsistent and easy to ignore. Practice Guides

    • Generational normalization. Digital natives are more comfortable with surveillance; a 2023 survey found that 29 % of Gen Z would even accept in-home government cameras to curb crime. cato.org

    Having listed elements to overcome, it’s easy to see why this feels sisyphean task in an American society. (It is similar, but different other Global North societies. The US desperately needs change as is evident with the current administration.) Getting to your question though, I feel like the real rational points to convey are not those above, but the reasons how a lack of privacy impacts individuals.

    • Political micro-targeting & democratic drift
      Platforms mine psychographic data to serve bespoke campaign messages that exploit confirmation bias, social-proof heuristics, and loss-aversion—leaving voters receptive to turnout-suppression or “vote-against-self-interest” nudges. A 2025 study found personality-tailored ads stayed significantly more persuasive than generic ones even when users were warned they were being targeted. Nature

    • Surveillance pricing & impulsive consumption
      Retailers and service-providers now run “surveillance pricing” engines that fine-tune what you see—and what it costs—based on location, device, credit profile, and browsing history. By pairing granular data with scarcity cues and anchoring, these systems push consumers toward higher-priced or unnecessary purchases while dulling price-comparison instincts. Federal Trade Commission

    • Dark-pattern commerce & hidden fees
      Interface tricks (pre-ticked boxes, countdown timers, labyrinthine unsubscribe flows) leverage present-bias and choice overload, trapping users in subscriptions or coaxing them to reveal more data than intended. Federal Trade Commission

    • Youth mental-health spiral
      Algorithmic feeds intensify social-comparison and negativity biases; among U.S. teen girls, 57 % felt “persistently sad or hopeless” and nearly 1 in 3 considered suicide in 2021—a decade-high that public-health experts link in part to round-the-clock, data-driven social media exposure. CDC

    • Chilling effects on knowledge, speech, and creativity
      After the Snowden leaks, measurable drops in searches and Wikipedia visits for sensitive topics illustrated how surveillance primes availability and fear biases, nudging citizens away from inquiry or dissent. Common Dreams

    • Algorithmic discrimination & structural inequity
      Predictive-policing models recycle historically biased crime data (representativeness bias), steering patrols back to the same neighborhoods; credit-scoring and lending algorithms charge Black and Latinx borrowers higher interest (statistical discrimination), entrenching wealth gaps. American Bar AssociationRobert F. Kennedy Human Rights

    • Personal-safety threats from data brokerage
      Brokers sell address histories, phone numbers, and real-time location snapshots; abusers can buy dossiers on domestic-violence survivors within minutes, exploiting the “search costs” gap between seeker and subject. EPIC

    • Identity theft & downstream financial harm
      With 1.35 billion breach notices issued in 2024 alone, stolen data fuels phishing, tax-refund fraud, bogus credit-card openings, and years of credit-score damage—costs that disproportionately hit low-information or low-income households. ITRC

    • Public-health manipulation & misinformation loops
      Health conspiracies spread via engagement-optimized feeds that exploit negativity and emotional-salience biases; a 2023 analysis of Facebook found antivaccine content became more politically polarized and visible after the platform’s cleanup efforts, undercutting risk-perception and vaccination decisions. PMC

    • Erosion of autonomy through behavioral “nudging”
      Recommendation engines continuously A/B-test content against your micro-profile, capitalizing on novelty-seeking and variable-reward loops (think endless scroll or autoplay). Over time, the platform—rather than the user—decides how hours and attention are spent, narrowing genuine choice. Nature

    • National-security & geopolitical leverage
      Bulk personal and geolocation data flowing to data-hungry foreign adversaries opens doors to espionage, blackmail, and influence operations—risks so acute that the DOJ’s 2025 Data Security Program now restricts many cross-border “covered data transactions.” Department of Justice

    • Social trust & civic cohesion
      When 77 % of Americans say they lack faith in social-media CEOs to handle data responsibly, the result is widespread mistrust—not just of tech firms but of institutions and one another—fueling polarization and disengagement. Pew Research Center

  • tomatolung@sopuli.xyztoWorld News@lemmy.world•Tesla sales plummet amid Elon Musk backlashEnglish
    4·
    3 months ago

    Your caredge article gives context for actual numbers rather then percent. Tesla sells between 110-170k per quarter in the US. It’s down 11% in January in the US according to Business Insider. While still selling 35,000 more vehicles then Ford in that month.

    Where as Germany sold 1,429 Tesla vehicles in February, Australia sold 1,592, and France 2,395.

    So the scale of sales is vastly different. This is not to say it’s not having an impact, but to dig into a percentage or statistics. (Mind you I wouldn’t use percentage in this post, except I can’t find the month on month numbers without paying for it, so I’ll wait for it to come out in future reports.)