I know it might sound like a minor ding, but the signup form doesn't allow apostrophes or accents in the name fields. Many people (myself included) have these in their legal names. I know this is US focused, but for an org that's all about data, this feels like a big oversight.
For starters, _most_ data-hoarding websites allow these characters these days, so it's just one more obstacle when trying to match and verify "my" data. I guess let's hope I signed up to every website with the same e-mail address?
On a similar note, it also rejected my 5-digit valid zip code as "invalid", so I'm unable to sign up at all.
This is another reason why I can't understand anyone who works in software of what is generally thought of as "technology" likes Yang. He does not understand. He likes to talk about "MATH". And while the numbers he uses may work out, I wonder how he acquires those numbers in the first place.
Also, it often seems like he needs "ENGLISH" more than "MATH". Because "technology" is a meaningless word. A carburetor is technology. A ramp is technology. Just about everything is technology in some fashion.
So. We already tax technology, if indirectly, through taxing goods and services.
Then there's the railing against the large targeted-advertising companies (I guess that's what they have most in common). There's technically been a trade already. Our data for their services.
And then there's the fact that he's now doing the thing he's complaining about: data harvesting.
And to top all of that off, the issues you just mentioned. This guy can't even harvest data effectively or efficiently. Or identify people who can. And I'm supposed to trust him to create legislation affecting those companies? Or identify people who can? He has just blatantly demonstrated he does not have those skills.
> Then there's the railing against the large targeted-advertising companies (I guess that's what they have most in common). There's technically been a trade already. Our data for their services.
So for whatever service they offer, we give them data. And extra secondary income from every third party they pass that same data along to. And the risk of first party data breaches. And the risk of data breaches from any other party that gets access. And likely that same data getting scraped by aggregators just from being used.
The deal is by no means equal, and we the customer pay dearly.
I'm quite happy with the idea of making it expensive to retain any data that's not required by law or explicit operational need.
Yang himself is not really a tech guy (he's an econ grad who became a lawyer, then ran companies and non-profits).
But looking at his book and platform, one can't help but notice that it heavily incorporates ideas that are popular in tech circles (UBI, automation, etc). Then on top of that he spends time talking about non-mainstream topics like Ranked Choice Voting, blockchain, etc. Who else talks about these things on the debate stage?
He tweeted about this as an idea a few days ago. It’s possible this was thrown together in a few days by a junior dev. While I’m all for data privacy, there’s much bigger issues I’m personally focused on, like the fact. Breonna Taylor’s murderers are not in jail. Andrew Yang tweeted that his solution would be to make cops wear pink. This guy is a joke.
Yang jokes around a bunch (and swears a lot in speeches too) but if you listen to his long form interviews he does go into a tremendous amount of depth, more-so than many other politicians do.
For starters, _most_ data-hoarding websites allow these characters these days, so it's just one more obstacle when trying to match and verify "my" data. I guess let's hope I signed up to every website with the same e-mail address?
On a similar note, it also rejected my 5-digit valid zip code as "invalid", so I'm unable to sign up at all.