[HN Gopher] Tell HN: Airbnb now opts in your name and photo to d...
___________________________________________________________________
Tell HN: Airbnb now opts in your name and photo to data sharing
I received an email today indicating AirBnb will now automatically
opt-in user's photo and first name in order to fight discrimination
via their "Project Lighthouse" There is no public content about
this change, but if you are logged in you can view this page and
opt out: https://www.airbnb.com/account-settings/privacy-and-
sharing/... Project Lighthouse If you
leave this setting turned on, you're helping us identify and
prevent discrimination from happening on Airbnb--and you're taking
part in an initiative to better understand how and where
discrimination happens on platforms like ours. If you
turn this setting off, we won't use your information, and we'll
remove it from future studies. You can change your mind at any
time. The bit about being opted in was hidden towards the
bottom of the email. Feels wrong.
Author : zschuessler
Score : 217 points
Date : 2020-07-03 17:20 UTC (5 hours ago)
| Zhenya wrote:
| I'm torn.
|
| What's better:
|
| 1) agree to their new terms and then opt-out
|
| 2) specifically disagree to the new terms but not be able to opt-
| out?
|
| ?
| bmarquez wrote:
| Account deleted. Honestly given the pandemic (variations of
| cleaning standards between homes and hotels, and increased
| pricing) this was an easy choice.
|
| From the email: "We know your privacy is important"
|
| Airbnb should prove it by making this opt-in instead of opt-out
| (and not hiding the choice with a bunch of boilerplate). I expect
| these dark patterns from a shadier website, not Airbnb.
|
| Edit: If you go through "Account settings" you are only given a
| choice to "deactivate" your account. To actually remove your
| information, go here: https://www.airbnb.com/privacy/manage-your-
| data
| ibejoeb wrote:
| Also, it launched and the email was sent on 30 June. Who knows
| whether opting out after that has any effect, because it's not
| clear on what "launch" is in this circumstance. They might have
| sent all the data over on the 30th.
| gundmc wrote:
| "So, to get these perceptions, we'll share Airbnb profile photos
| and the first names associated with them with an independent
| partner that's not part of Airbnb. "
|
| I have to imagine they considered making this opt-in and realized
| the vast majority of users wouldn't take action to increase
| sharing of their personal data. Despite the good cause, it is
| incredibly shady that they would implement this as an opt-out.
|
| IANAL, but I would think that this would be a flagrant violation
| of privacy laws in many regions outside the US (this policy is
| limited to US hosts and guests).
|
| Edit: I also did not receive an email, but found the toggle
| active in my account preferences after reading this post.
| ibejoeb wrote:
| It's only US users right now. Here's a more detailed
| announcement: https://www.airbnb.com/resources/hosting-
| homes/a/a-new-way-w...
|
| Whatever good intention might be behind this, it's really off-
| putting to me. They send your photo and name to a third party
| who is tasked with evaluating those to determine your race.
|
| "will look at these photos and first names and indicate their
| perceptions--or, what race they think the information we shared
| suggests. They'll share these perceptions with a specialized
| team at Airbnb exclusively for anti-discrimination work"
|
| Presumably that'll be correlated to booking data to identify
| rejections. I can't think of any other use case.
|
| Gotta say, if someone truly doesn't want me to stay somewhere
| because of my race, I'll take that rejection rather than force
| myself into a shitty situation.
| ponker wrote:
| Exactly! The AirBNB setup puts both parties in a vulnerable
| spot. If people are racist let them can my reservation, I
| don't wanna see them either!
| teej wrote:
| This presumably helps Airbnb deplatform racist hosts, which
| is a better outcome in my opinion.
| dmode wrote:
| An opt-in strategy has some challenges here as the data may
| become biased a cohort of users and you wouldn't be able to
| tell whether rejections are due to discrimination or the
| natural course of business. And opt-out strategy allows for the
| data to be as representative about the platform as possible
| m0ck wrote:
| Great, now the corporations found a way to virtue signal AND
| steal your privacy at the same time!
|
| /s
| BoiledCabbage wrote:
| I've recently come to the realization that more often than not
| people who use the phrase "virtual signal" is actually a really
| great signal in itself.
|
| Essentially a good chunk of people do care so little about
| discrimination, that it's difficult for them to believe that
| others actually even care about it.
|
| In this case, at it's face, to see a statement that Airbnb is
| collecting data to investigate if their platform is being used
| for discrimination - and then reach the conclusion that the
| most logical reason that Airbnb is collecting data is not
| because they want to know if their platform is being used to
| discriminate, but that instead it's just a ruse; they don't
| care and really just want to collect facial data in order to
| look like they care about discrimination to gain some side
| benefit.
|
| Somehow via reasoning to think that that was the most logical
| conclusion is pretty amazing. It conveys so frequently as: I
| care so little about discrimination that I can't even imagine
| that Airbnb actually wants data and cares about discrimination
| - there must be some other reason.
|
| And again, I can't make that conclusion about the statement
| above (because we've not discussed it), but from other
| discussions with people that's what surprisingly frequently
| ends up being the underlying thinking.
| zebnyc wrote:
| Do you think it is possible to be suspicious about the
| motivations of faceless corporations driven by a profit
| motive without be accused of "caring little about
| discrimination" / labelled as a racist / misogynist / anti-
| LGTBTQ?
| BoiledCabbage wrote:
| At no point was anyone labeled a racist, misogynist or
| anti-LGBTQ. I actually do have concerns about Airbnb using
| an opt-in policy for this. However, my point wasn't about
| "how do I feel about Airbnb's change in policy". Ok, so
| what _was_ it about:
|
| A guy getting a job at an animal shelter because he thinks
| it'll help him get laid is virtue signaling. Someone
| adhering to a religious practice by fasting is virtue
| signaling. Someone changing their facebook profile pic to
| have a logo for some cause is virtue signaling. A company
| prompted by recent events wanting to investigate if there
| is discrimination on their platform isn't.
| necovek wrote:
| So a person wanting to promote a cause through their FB
| profile is "virtue signalling" even if they do it
| regardless of recent events (let's imagine someone
| putting up a "stop racism" banner there 5 years ago), but
| a company doing that when the public eye is on it is not
| "virtue signalling".
|
| Mhkay.
|
| While I believe one can be genuine in either case, I find
| it more likely to be "virtue signalling" when it's a
| company doing something on a hot topic right now.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| tomp wrote:
| AirBnB has a long history of not caring for its users, unless
| they get bat PR. So yeah, if anything, thinking that they
| _actually_ care about discrimination is a bit naive.
| ibejoeb wrote:
| No, the problem is that the same data can be used at least as
| easily to discriminate, and people who care about that don't
| like it.
|
| Do you really want to build a race database?
|
| Do you want Airbnb making determinations about the intention
| of your actions based on a secret race database?
|
| The timing isn't accidental; they even state as much in the
| announcement. This is driven by current events. I wonder if
| anyone would give a pass to 23andme if they started
| oversharing DNA data "to battle covid."
| BoiledCabbage wrote:
| This post is unrelated to my comment and shouldn't be a
| reply here. You should post it as a top level comment about
| your feelings towards airbnb's policy.
| [deleted]
| mlthoughts2018 wrote:
| > " In this case, at it's face, to see a statement that
| Airbnb is collecting data to investigate if their platform is
| being used for discrimination - and then reach the conclusion
| that the most logical reason that Airbnb is collecting data
| is not because they want to know if their platform is being
| used to discriminate, but that instead it's just a ruse; they
| don't care and really just want to collect facial data in
| order to look like they care about discrimination to gain
| some side benefit."
|
| This is a good model of most human behavior though. Creating
| elaborate systems of social norms then covertly coordinating
| on how to evade them or politically argue about how some
| group gets punished for violating them, while another group
| gets to violate the norms but reap benefits.
|
| The economist Robin Hanson has developed a pretty
| comprehensive social science body of theory under the name
| "homo hypocritus" for this and uses it to explain a lot of
| behaviors (see just four examples below).
|
| It's totally reasonable to disagree with Hanson's theory, but
| I think you are going way too far to treat it almost like
| paranoia or conspiracy theories or something.
|
| In fact I think given the way corporate scandals, dark
| patterns, rampant privacy violations, etc. are so egregiously
| common and often go unpunished, it should be the norm to
| assume harmful intent from corporations unless proven
| otherwise. Classic studies like Moral Mazes would seem to
| confirm this.
|
| Examples
|
| - https://www.cato-unbound.org/2011/07/13/robin-hanson/who-
| car...
|
| - http://www.overcomingbias.com/2013/08/inequality-is-about-
| gr...
|
| - http://mason.gmu.edu/~rhanson/showcare.pdf
|
| - https://80000hours.org/podcast/episodes/robin-hanson-on-
| lyin...
| ponker wrote:
| Your comment also reflects a common type of "parrot" response
| -- any critique of activities in this space gets the critic
| branded as "uncaring" or even worse like "racist." Don't
| think that AirBNB should send your photo to a third party to
| be racially described, and think that AirBNB couldn't give a
| shit about you and is just doing this for PR points? You must
| not care about "white supremacy."
| skinkestek wrote:
| > Essentially a good chunk of people do care so little about
| discrimination, that it's difficult for them to believe that
| others actually even care about it.
|
| Some of us care somewhat (i.e. I'm proud to have convinced my
| boss to hire that female IT technician from another country
| who was mopping our floors. It took some convincing but he
| gave in. She got paid as much as us and got a career here in
| the west (I know because she later married a friend of mine).
| I've also tried elsewhere to help others to a career in IT,
| not sure how far I have succeeded in other cases, but in at
| least on case I gave away my well paid but boring job to make
| sure another less privileged man got a fighting chance. I
| visited him last year and he had usef his opportunity well.
| Oh, and I helped my neighbor down the street to a better job
| and tried to help his girlfriend. In the end she got a good
| job through other channels but I tried and I tried so in a
| way that was appreciated, not in a creepy way.)
|
| All that said: that doesn't mean I won't say virtue
| signalling when something like this happens.
|
| Oh. And the irony of me virtue signalling so heavily to get
| my point through :-) At least my identity is only known to me
| and Dan, so I can't cash out on any stupid internet points I
| get.
| jariel wrote:
| 'Virtue Signalling' is not about whether someone 'cares'
| about racism, it's about wether their actions amount to
| anything material or relevant.
|
| Almost everyone actually 'cares' about racism, at least in
| classical, crude forms. If someone calls a black person the
| 'n-word' - almost everyone 'cares' enough to know this is
| wrong.
|
| But there are any number of people who Tweet this, say that,
| or even take some action that is utterly irrelevant to the
| material nature of advancing the cause, but a the same time,
| they are embellishing their own position or status.
|
| 'Personal Branding' is the living job of every actor,
| politician and political figure. That's 95% of their job. The
| statements they make are mostly about engendering to and
| audience.
|
| A good example is the Gavin Newsom's wife, who has declared
| that she will be the 'First Partner' - and not the 'First
| Lady' of California because the term 'Lady' is
| 'exclusionary'.
|
| I don't doubt there's materiality to her statement; she
| probably does 'care' about the issue on some level - but I
| doubt deeply that her actions matter and that this is mostly
| an opportunity for her to make a 'public statement' that the
| press will like, hop on, propagate, which endows here with
| 'progressive credibility' to possible voters. I significantly
| doubt she would ever do such a thing outside the context of
| the political lens. To boot - it's also counter productive
| because the term 'Wife' or 'First Lady' is in _no way_
| exclusionary. It 's _gendered_ yes, but no more so than we
| used gendered pronouns 'he' and 'she'. It's 'invented
| equality' that serves no purpose other than a nice bit of PR.
| That is 'virtue signalling'. [1]
|
| A very excessive, fascist example of 'Virtue Signalling' from
| the Mayor of Oakland just this week. She initiated an FBI
| 'hate crime' investigation into some ropes hanging from a
| tree in the park. Those ropes were there to hold swings for
| kids, ironically put there by someone in the Black community.
| Nobody had complained or thought this 'kids equipment' was
| symbolic of anything, there was no public intrigue - but the
| Mayor took it upon herself to make a big fuss about it. To
| make the situation 'scary Orwellian' her public statement was
| that 'Intentions Don't Matter'. Read that again and consider
| the consequences. A swing set in a park in her view, is
| construed as a 'hate crime' irrespective of the fact that
| it's merely a swing set, not indicative of anything, placed
| there by a black man, in which nobody had any complaints.
| This is the Mayor of a major US city, who has initiated FBI
| investigations which could destroy people's lives, for
| absolutely no reason. [2]
|
| The reason this is 'Virtue Signalling' - is because nobody
| outside of political theatre cares and the issue is
| irrelevant. Why was it only the 'mayor' who had to invent
| non-existent hate crimes? If there were any legitimacy at all
| to the situation, others would clearly be concerned. But
| there was no concern. The excessive, fascist reaction by the
| Mayor is therefore vapid, it's utterly political. It's an
| attempt to engender her credibility as a 'force against
| racism' - even at the cost of using the power of violence of
| the state over common sense. But like Trump supporters
| wouldn't condemn him 'if he shot someone' ... her supporters
| won't condemn her for her ridiculous display either.
|
| A less extreme but more relevant example would be Alexandria
| Occasio-Cortez total rejection of Amazon's bid for a major HQ
| in NYC. Both the Democratic Governor, and 'far left' wing
| Democratic Mayor were both 'extremely' in favour of the
| opportunity, with Amazon to bring in thousands of very good,
| high paying jobs, along with so much incremental surplus.
| They were to receive the same support from the city/state
| that any other company gets. AOC rejected the offer because
| of Amazon's unwillingness to work with her directly by making
| $$$ investments in schools, and other things. Ironically,
| even the majority of people of colour in her district
| supported Amazons bid which puts her at odds with basically
| everyone that matters. Amazon is not some 'evil corporate
| devil' - they're a big, succesfull company, and the elevated
| taxation and incidental business from them is probably the
| closest thing any city could get to 'organic development' -
| which is to say 'things working well as they should' without
| having to resort to arbitrary distributions of wealth etc..
| AOC knows this. In any other condition, I believe she would
| probably support Amazon's bid - but in a political context,
| she defines herself as an antagonist against 'evil
| corporations'. She can't 'support Amazon', that would be akin
| to making a deal with the Devil, at least in her popular,
| bombastic personal branding. From a marketing perspective,
| AOC is _exactly on point_ to 'fight Amazon' even if in
| reality, it's possibly the best thing that could ever happen
| for her district (I understand it's not all roses, but
| overall, it would be good). So this is a toxic example of
| 'Virtue Signalling' wherein we don't doubt the ultimate
| sincerity of the individual, but where their motives are
| inconsistent with their actions, which are actually
| detrimental.
|
| Finally - though we don't use it in this context too often,
| 'Virtue Signalling' could be equally applied to other things
| such as flag waving by fools who actually don't materially
| care about the nation, or those who espouse Christianity but
| really are the furthest thing from it. Donald Trump holding
| up a Bible (upside down no less) for a photo-op a few weeks
| ago is a repulsive form of 'Virtue Signalling' because,
| though surely he thinks he cares about America and probably
| thinks he's a 'good Christian' - the man probably hasn't been
| in a Church in 20 years and generally has nothing to do with
| it.
|
| Every corporation is in the business of perception. AirBnB
| has a _very expensive_ PR agency who will oversee their
| public announcements. Every politician and celebrity has
| power because they have carefully shaped their public image,
| not because they have necessarily 'done anything'. In many
| cases, they are 'talented' or 'are business with good
| intentions' or 'have accomplishments' but it doesn't matter -
| if they are going to be playing the 'message spinning game'
| we should absolutely be cynical. If they want something from
| you: sales, popularity for their career, votes - they are
| marketing to you.
|
| [1] https://time.com/5499825/newsom-first-partner-first-lady/
|
| [2] https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/ropes-resembling-
| nooses...
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| dmode wrote:
| Your post is disingenuous. I got the same email and it very
| clearly lays out that you can opt out of the settings. This was
| not hidden in some obscure T&C. You can click the opt out link on
| the email directly and opt out.
| newsbinator wrote:
| I didn't get that email. This post (and the opt-out link OP
| shared) was the only reason I knew to turn this off.
| neonate wrote:
| Same here. That's bad. I would never have known about this
| otherwise.
| advisedwang wrote:
| I got the email and it was focused on:
|
| a) Saying this program was to fight discrimination, and
|
| b) Saying they weren't collecting new data or doing anything
| nefarious.
|
| What it left out was clearly explaining what they _were_ doing.
| I had to parse text carefully and use my own familiarity with
| the industry to understand that they were going to decide my
| race based on my photo/name.
|
| Without clearly explaining what the new data use is, you can't
| expect people to make an informed decision about opting-out.
| addflip wrote:
| > I had to parse text carefully and use my own familiarity
| with the industry to understand that they were going to
| decide my race based on my photo/name
|
| Yup. This is exactly what I took it as. Between this and
| their other data sharing policies I decided to delete my
| account.
| dmode wrote:
| Here's the email copy. It very clearly states exactly what
| this is doing. Not sure what text you need to parse here
|
| " We'll only use information you already share This project
| will address discrimination that's based on perception--so
| we'll use first names and profile photos from hosts and
| guests to help us understand the perceived race someone might
| associate with them.
|
| We'll use it to uncover patterns of discrimination We'll use
| this information to help us understand when and where racial
| discrimination is happening on our platform. Any insights
| will be used to help develop new features and policies that
| create a more equitable experience for everyone.
|
| Information won't be tied to your specific account We know
| your privacy is important, so we analyze trends in bulk and
| Airbnb won't associate perceived race information with your
| account. We won't use this information in marketing or
| advertising, and it will only be used for anti-discrimination
| work.
|
| We consulted with and solicited input from leading civil
| rights and privacy organizations to guide us We know how
| delicate this work is--so we developed this work with support
| and input from leading civil rights organizations like Color
| Of Change and Upturn, along with privacy organizations like
| Center for Democracy & Technology, to make sure our approach
| is both thoughtful and respectful of your privacy.
|
| You can opt out in your Privacy Settimsg"
| [deleted]
| bboyrival wrote:
| There's a lot more nuance to this:
|
| https://www.airbnb.com/resources/hosting-homes/a/a-new-way-w...
|
| I would also consider reading the white paper if you have some
| time:
|
| https://news.airbnb.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2020/06/P...
|
| TLDR is that that information is stripped of Airbnb identifying
| information, asymmetrically encrypted before perceived race is
| determined, then noise is added when the data is returned to
| Airbnb to prevent identifying individuals. This data is only used
| for identifying acceptance rate disparity.
| dividuum wrote:
| Seems GDPR prevents that in Europe. I see now such option at the
| linked url.
| dvt wrote:
| Instantly disabled it, thank you for the heads up! Interestingly,
| I did _not_ get an email that alerted me to the change.
| whymauri wrote:
| I didn't get one either.
| seppin wrote:
| Me neither, I had three settings I needed to "update" to
| prevent my image from being circulated without my approval.
|
| Bad form, Airbnb.
| Giorgi wrote:
| That's weird, there is no "Project Lighthouse" option for me. Is
| it rolled out only in US?
| ibejoeb wrote:
| Yes, it's US-only now.
|
| FAQ: https://www.airbnb.com/resources/hosting-homes/a/a-new-
| way-w...
| commoner wrote:
| Airbnb also uses your personal information for direct marketing.
| You can opt out by sending an email to: opt-out@airbnb.com
|
| > Where permissible according to applicable law we may use
| certain limited personal information about you, such as your
| email address, to hash it and to share it with social media
| platforms, such as Facebook or Google, to generate leads, drive
| traffic to our websites or otherwise promote our products and
| services or the Airbnb Platform.
|
| > Please note that you may, at any time ask Airbnb to cease
| processing your data for these direct marketing purposes by
| sending an e-mail to opt-out@airbnb.com.
|
| > In some jurisdictions, applicable law may entitle you to
| require Airbnb and Airbnb Payments not to process your personal
| information for certain specific purposes (including profiling)
| where such processing is based on legitimate interest.
|
| > Where your personal information is processed for direct
| marketing purposes, you may, at any time ask Airbnb to cease
| processing your data for these direct marketing purposes by
| sending an e-mail to opt-out@airbnb.com.
|
| https://www.airbnb.com/terms/privacy_policy
| jdm2212 wrote:
| The bit about it being opt-out was surprising but not in any way
| "hidden". It's literally the first thing in the email after the
| explanation of what Project Lighthouse is.
| addflip wrote:
| I got this email and it was not exactly easy to turn it off
| considering I hadn't logged in to my Airbnb account in a while.
| Perhaps a better solution would have been to provide a click
| within the email that would allow you to turn it off from
| there.
| zentiggr wrote:
| Or maybe even make the project, leave it off per user by
| default and include directions on how to opt in?
| dmode wrote:
| There is a direct click on the email that leads you to the
| setting page. I am using a gmail client, so not sure if the
| link doesn't appear in other emails
| addflip wrote:
| Yes. There is a link in the email that leads you to the
| settings page but I hadn't logged in a while so after
| entering my phone number along with the code they sent me I
| also had to enter a code they sent to my email. My point
| being that clicking the link in the email should
| automatically turn off the "feature" I shouldn't have to
| log in.
| coolspot wrote:
| My experience as well.
| seppin wrote:
| I don't read corporate newsletters from services I use twice a
| year, do you?
| jimmaswell wrote:
| Why do hosts even get to reject people or see their picture or
| even name before making the decision? I don't see any legitimate
| use, only illegitimate use like denying based on race. Let hosts
| set a minimum stay length and such if they want but that should
| be it.
| bpodgursky wrote:
| Wouldn't the picture be necessary if you want to make sure that
| the people who actually showed up are the same as the profile
| you OK'd to stay in the first place?
| namdnay wrote:
| I guess it's important to see the guest profile/history, you
| wouldn't want to let people who have previously had problems
| into your home?
| jlm451 wrote:
| Right, seeing a user's previous reviews by hosts makes sense.
| I would guess that having a name & face makes hosts more
| comfortable, although it does allow for discrimination?
| theklub wrote:
| Airbnb is quickly becoming an eBay. A product people hate but
| have little alternative to.
| [deleted]
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2020-07-03 23:00 UTC)