If Netflix had attached credit card info and social security numbers to the info would you be singing the same tune? You're basically saying that you don't like the outcome due to your perceived utility of the data. Thanks I don't see you talking about:

  - Do you view this as a breach of privacy?
  - What do you consider private?
  - Do you view this as a breach of privacy, but just
    don't care?
  - Do you feel that the utility of the data out-weighs
    the privacy concerns?
  - What about the people that view this as an invasion
    of privacy and have their Netflix user data in that
    set? Should they be thrown under the bus in the pursuit
    of progress because *you* feel that the data has more
    utility than the privacy concerns do?

I see a lot of people arguing that this is 'stifling innovation,' but innovation is not an end unto itself. Banning using human test subjects against their will in the pursuit of scientific knowledge 'stifles innovation' too, but I think you would be hard-pressed to find many people to see that as a bad thing. "Stifling innovation" in the pursuit of privacy concerns should be a noble cause. It benefits the public. This is hardly the argument against intellectual property rights and I really find it annoying that people seem to be lumping it into the same ballpark with these boilerplate "stifling innovation" comments.

I see it as a breach of privacy people might have prevented had they known about the dangers of their reviews getting linked to their accounts. Many companies have their large credit card databases stolen or hacked into through sheer incompetence. Netflix is not in the same boat with these.

So... having private info stolen == bad company, releasing private info == good company.

And if pigs were ducks would they quack? In other words, your question is moronic since netflix didn't attach cc or ssn info.

Also, you're a retard for comparing movie predictions, and the possibility of matching a person to their movie viewing history, as even remotely comparable to human test subjects. Please.

As for invasion of privacy, I'm unsure -- I'm not sure of the probability of matching, the quantity of information necessary to get a good, for various values of good, match, etc. What is clear is the authors had a major hand in stifling a nontrivial nonacademic dataset and damaging the community around it. They further have aided the lawyers suing netflix, and have helped poison the well for any company in the future that decides they might want to do something like this. So I say congratulations! For the author to pretend this didn't happen as a result of his actions is disingenuous.

As for your questions, well, they're just stupid. We live in a world where the fbi/police get access to your PHYSICAL LOCATION 24x7 without a warrant just by asking, where your emails and telephone calls are scanned by the nsa with plans to open this data set to the police at large, where google/yahoo/et al see turning your emails and access patterns over to the police as a revenue opportunity, etc. If you care about privacy, this is such small potatoes as to be a waste of time. BTW, anyone can still spend roughly $100 to access your phone call history. G has, in subpoenable form, your entire search history -- and don't think that clearing cookies prevents stapling that history together.

> We live in a world where the fbi/police get access to your PHYSICAL LOCATION 24x7 without a warrant just by asking, where your emails and telephone calls are scanned by the nsa with plans to open this data set to the police at large, where google/yahoo/et al see turning your emails and access patterns over to the police as a revenue opportunity, etc.

So you're saying that since government agencies have access to a lot of my private information, I shouldn't care about any of my private information remaining private? Sounds like you're creating a false dichotomy. You're presenting things as if you can only care about all of your private data or none of your private data; since the government has access to large portions of your private data and you don't have much (or any) control over that, you should therefore care about none of your private data. Isn't it possible for me to care about all of my private data, but to choose the battles that I fight?

And your hill to die on is that someone might guess a movie someone in your household rented. Okay then.

Death of a thousand cuts

Or, are they opening the door for you to profit from selling access to a utility map reduce cluster focused on their data set?