FYI: Civ6 contains Red Shell Analytics Software

[sixty4half]

I see a lot of statements like "I don't care what it does or doesn't do"

You guys are arguing on principle. Without full knowledge. And you're doing so, knowingly. Like you don't care that you don't know what you're talking about, even though you know that you don't know.

Either educate yourself and make a proper argument for what is wrong with Redshell, or just admit that you have larger issues with internet privacy and are using this as a "proxy war" of sorts so that you can feel that you're fighting against the man, for justice.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I see a lot of statements like "I don't care what it does or doesn't do"

You guys are arguing on principle. Without full knowledge. And you're doing so, knowingly. Like you don't care that you don't know what you're talking about, even though you know that you don't know.

Either educate yourself and make a proper argument for what is wrong with Redshell, or just admit that you have larger issues with internet privacy and are using this as a "proxy war" of sorts so that you can feel that you're fighting against the man, for justice.

I know that Firaxis hasn't taken the time to explain why they chose to use Redshell, what it does, or why they felt it was important to add this to our service arrangement after they'd taken my money. And that's what's caused me to lose trust in Firaxis.

And yes, I think that's an important principle. When you're dealing with an evolving issue like privacy, businesses should overcommunicate, not undercommunicate, to their customers about what they're doing and why.

 

[Karpius]

I think we can all agree Firaxis acted poorly. I think we can all agree Firaxis owes an apology (for what its worth).

What I can't get over is the level of shock and indignation because a company failed to report it was doing what everyone else was doing. Heck, Firaxis was already doing it, that just added in Red Shell without telling us. Not polite of them, but I really think the original agreement allowed it. Its sort of like that line from the movie "Casablanca" when Major Renault (a frequent visitor of Rick's Cafe) exclaims with indignant protest...
"I am shocked - shocked! - to find gambling going on in here!"

I get it, some people feel better being told exactly who is collecting data. But we are being naive if we don't understand that everyone is collecting data whether they tell us or not and we have NO control over it except to exercise our marketing prerogatives. And in this day and age, I am not even sure that will be enough.

The action is not futile, I've not bought the DLC/Expansion and won't buy civ7 until they change the way they communicate with us (specifically in relation to modding), because yes, it's the only action that matters.

That right there is the only real protest that will matter to Firaxis...or any such company. Let them think their practices will cost them money, and they will alter their practice. In the meantime, it means doing without the desired product. Its all a matter of who can hold out the longest.

Red Shell - and a host of other such outfits - will get your data one way or another, whether you like it or not. Its what they do! They mine data from a million different sources and we have been providing that data for years and years. Even despite all the claims that it is done in a way that is not identifiable to the individual, I fully expect my data is out there to be found. I consciously and knowingly accept that as a risk of engaging on the internet because it was a known risk from the first time I got a credit card in 1980.

If you don't want your data collected, GET OFF THE GRID! Stop worrying about every Tom, Dick and Harry that pops up to analyze your 'usage' when you have already agreed to thousands of others doing exactly the same.

 

[TheMeInTeam]

I see a lot of statements like "I don't care what it does or doesn't do"

You guys are arguing on principle. Without full knowledge. And you're doing so, knowingly. Like you don't care that you don't know what you're talking about, even though you know that you don't know.

Either educate yourself and make a proper argument for what is wrong with Redshell, or just admit that you have larger issues with internet privacy and are using this as a "proxy war" of sorts so that you can feel that you're fighting against the man, for justice.

The fact that it's not clear precisely what it's doing is a significant problem in its own right. Unless you can provide a comprehensive list of everything it does with high confidence simply by reading EULA or looking at information on your computer, there is a point beyond just the "principle" and it's pretty difficult to refute it.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

I get it, some people feel better being told exactly who is collecting data. But we are being naive if we don't understand that everyone is collecting data whether they tell us or not and we have NO control over it except to exercise our marketing prerogatives. And in this day and age, I am not even sure that will be enough.

...

If you don't want your data collected, GET OFF THE GRID! Stop worrying about every Tom, Dick and Harry that pops up to analyze your 'usage' when you have already agreed to thousands of others doing exactly the same.

I'm not sure that's the only end result or the only solution. I do agree it's a pretty close approximation of where we are now. But is it where we need to be 20 years from now? Maybe, but I'm not sure. I'm far from being wise enough to figure out the best, practical approach to the laws and norms that should surround the collection and use of personal data, but two things I am certain about are:

1. It's an issue that needs to be discussed, and businesses do society no favours in the long run when they approach personal data collection as something they should just do without explaining what they're doing. To the extent such behaviour provides a competitive advantage, then as a consumer, I'm comfortable "leaning against the wind" and doing my best to direct my spending towards businesses that don't take that approach.
2. It isn't helpful to suggest that only people who live "off the grid" should worry about this topic or participate in a discussion about it. We can all think about the topic and express what is and isn't acceptable from our perspective. And we need to focus on specific instances like this one, because you can't get to a general norm without reviewing how you think it should apply in specific circumstances.

 

[Duuk]

The problem with this logic and this argument is that the overwhelming majority of people actually LIKE datamining and data collection, they just don't like it when it's called that.

We like it when we walk into a CVS and the CVS app on our phone bings a notification that says, "You haven't bought toothpaste in 45 days, you're probably running low, you have a CVS reward coupon for 25% off Crest, which is your favorite brand!" but when you point out that is a serious level of datamining people act like they have no idea. We live in a world where we want to be able to say, "Ok Google, order me a pizza" and have our phone say, "Order your usual from your favorite place? Is delivery ok? Put it on your debit card or on your Visa?" and have it handle the transaction for us automatically without realizing that level of convenience is a serious level of datamining.

You sit down at your computer and Steam starts up and lets you know that some new cool game is coming out that you will probably like by an indy publisher you've never heard of. You click the ad and watch the preview and suddenly you DO follow it, add it to your wishlist, and pick it up when it goes on a Steam sale.

Datamining. An example I used to explain to my sister yesterday was World of Warcraft. Hardcore elitist players used to scream and complain all the time about how bad WoWs graphics sucked and Blizzard would never update them and the ElitistJerks would always drool on their knuckles and whine.

So Blizzard finally released the datamined stats on the PCs of who was running WoW. At the time I believe Windows 7 was the "new computers" default (like 2009/2010) and XP was an 8 year old OS. But Blizzard pointed out that something like 75% of its users were still on XP, half of its users had a video card more than 3 years old, 1/3 of its users had the "recommended" or less RAM, etc. Their datamining told them that pushing the limits on PC power would ruin their client experience and lose them customers.

 

[blackbutterfly]

FYI the first GDPR ruling has been issued...by Germany -> https://www.natlawreview.com/article/german-court-issues-first-gdpr-ruling

2K is gonna get fined for use of Red Shell.

 

[Kwami]

The problem with this logic and this argument is that the overwhelming majority of people actually LIKE datamining and data collection, they just don't like it when it's called that.

We like it when we walk into a CVS and the CVS app on our phone bings a notification that says, "You haven't bought toothpaste in 45 days, you're probably running low, you have a CVS reward coupon for 25% off Crest, which is your favorite brand!" but when you point out that is a serious level of datamining people act like they have no idea. We live in a world where we want to be able to say, "Ok Google, order me a pizza" and have our phone say, "Order your usual from your favorite place? Is delivery ok? Put it on your debit card or on your Visa?" and have it handle the transaction for us automatically without realizing that level of convenience is a serious level of datamining.

And those of us that do care about tracking and privacy opt out of these features and make do without just fine. I certainly don't install any such apps on my phone and the voice communication feature has been disabled since day 1.

Datamining. An example I used to explain to my sister yesterday was World of Warcraft. Hardcore elitist players used to scream and complain all the time about how bad WoWs graphics sucked and Blizzard would never update them and the ElitistJerks would always drool on their knuckles and whine.

So Blizzard finally released the datamined stats on the PCs of who was running WoW. At the time I believe Windows 7 was the "new computers" default (like 2009/2010) and XP was an 8 year old OS. But Blizzard pointed out that something like 75% of its users were still on XP, half of its users had a video card more than 3 years old, 1/3 of its users had the "recommended" or less RAM, etc. Their datamining told them that pushing the limits on PC power would ruin their client experience and lose them customers.

Again...

1. Not all data collection is equal. Collecting data that's actually used to improve the game that I'm playing might be OK. Keeping it all in-house is better than using third parties. Telling me that you're collecting this data in advance is important. I'm mostly OK with Blizzard collecting that information. They should provide an opt-out, though.

2. Using a third party to collect information about which websites I visit and which ads I click in order to improve sales, while not telling me that you're doing so, is not OK.

Do you all really not see the difference here?

 

[Duuk]

FYI the first GDPR ruling has been issued...by Germany -> https://www.natlawreview.com/article/german-court-issues-first-gdpr-ruling

2K is gonna get fined for use of Red Shell.

...That ruling, if I'm reading the summary right, is going to reek havoc on the internet. You can't list a technical contact for a domain?

 

[Kwami]

...That ruling, if I'm reading the summary right, is going to reek havoc on the internet. You can't list a technical contact for a domain?

You can list one if you want to. The ruling simply states that ICANN can't compel you to list a technical contact.

 

[Karpius]

It isn't helpful to suggest that only people who live "off the grid" should worry about this topic or participate in a discussion about it. We can all think about the topic and express what is and isn't acceptable from our perspective. And we need to focus on specific instances like this one, because you can't get to a general norm without reviewing how you think it should apply in specific circumstances.

The general norm is the basic fact that your data is out there and has been for decades. The specifics of how to address that are myriad and complex.

At what level of security are we comfortable?
How much transparency do we want about where our data goes? Will each individual user research each entity included in the long list before deciding to engage with a specific company?
What parts of our data are we willing to share?
Will people demand the same from their internet provider and refuse to use said provider if they don't like what they learn?
What laws do we want to have in order to punish any violators of such transparency?
How much 'prevention' do we want to have in place?
How much convenience are we willing to give up in order to have these protections?
How much do we want the government involved, or should it be a grass roots effort based solely on our collective spending power?
If not enough people are willing to inconvenience themselves in order to compel the companies into a practice we want, how do we proceed?
Would laws in one country be applicable in another?
Can we guarantee that every site in the world will honor the laws of the country of the specific user/costumer?
Can we compel foreign sites to be as transparent as domestic sites?

These are just some of the issues that I, as a non-lawyer, can come up with off the top of my head. And these don't even address the willful hackers who already break the law trying to steal money in all those easy electronic transactions. Its a huge and growing issue and for the foreseeable future the only true and real protection of your data is to simply not transmit it. Period.

 

[Trav'ling Canuck]

The problem with this logic and this argument is that the overwhelming majority of people actually LIKE datamining and data collection, they just don't like it when it's called that.

We like it when we walk into a CVS and the CVS app on our phone bings a notification that says, "You haven't bought toothpaste in 45 days, you're probably running low, you have a CVS reward coupon for 25% off Crest, which is your favorite brand!" but when you point out that is a serious level of datamining people act like they have no idea. We live in a world where we want to be able to say, "Ok Google, order me a pizza" and have our phone say, "Order your usual from your favorite place? Is delivery ok? Put it on your debit card or on your Visa?" and have it handle the transaction for us automatically without realizing that level of convenience is a serious level of datamining.

You sit down at your computer and Steam starts up and lets you know that some new cool game is coming out that you will probably like by an indy publisher you've never heard of. You click the ad and watch the preview and suddenly you DO follow it, add it to your wishlist, and pick it up when it goes on a Steam sale.

Datamining. An example I used to explain to my sister yesterday was World of Warcraft. Hardcore elitist players used to scream and complain all the time about how bad WoWs graphics sucked and Blizzard would never update them and the ElitistJerks would always drool on their knuckles and whine.

So Blizzard finally released the datamined stats on the PCs of who was running WoW. At the time I believe Windows 7 was the "new computers" default (like 2009/2010) and XP was an 8 year old OS. But Blizzard pointed out that something like 75% of its users were still on XP, half of its users had a video card more than 3 years old, 1/3 of its users had the "recommended" or less RAM, etc. Their datamining told them that pushing the limits on PC power would ruin their client experience and lose them customers.

I don't know what the overwhelming majority of people may or may not want, but if your argument is that if you told people "we'd like to collect your data so we can provide this service to you", many would agree to have their data collected, I suspect that's probably true.

If your argument is many people would say "give me the service but don't collect my data", that's probably true, too. People are irrational a lot, that's not a reason not to have rules. If anything, it's an argument for why there should be rules.

If your argument is "people like what businesses do with their data, so businesses should be free to collect it whenever and however they want", then that I disagree with. Yes, from the perspective of the business, as with the Blizzard example you provided, the data has value. Although businesses can operate in an irrational fashion, too (they are, after all, staffed by people), it's a pretty safe bet they only make an effort to collect data if they think it can help them, and its unlikely to help them unless it allows them to sell more to people, which means they need to use the data to create a better or more customized product or service.

That to me is not sufficient justification for us to have a society where it's considered acceptable for businesses to collect any data they can by whatever means they can without telling us how and what they're doing. Nor should they not be allowed to collect any data. What data, how, and with what level of disclosure -> to my mind those are the key issues, and it starts with businesses being forthright about what they want to do and why.

 

[leif erikson]

Moderator Action: We are rapidly heading out of the Civ World. Please keep this related to Civilization 6.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889

edit - Moderator Action: Thread closed for now. Removed a post that did not follow warning above.
Please read the forum rules: http://forums.civfanatics.com/showthread.php?t=422889