Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 441 posts

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#211

Post by criddell »

danarmak wrote: post #74
pdkl95 wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> any data, besides name, password, email address Collect any data you want if and only if you have the informed consent of the user. This means explaining in detail what you're intending to collect and gaining permission first (opt-in). > This information can never be sold. Sell the information if you want (that was collected with informed consent of the user), but collecting data brings a responsibility of care for…

Users already opt into using a service like WhatsApp. They are presented with TOS on first use / account creation. Whatsapp changed their TOS and presented the new TOS to existing users when they first opened the app after the change. Doesn't this already satisfy your requirements? It is, of course, well known that users never read TOS / EULA for software or services.

> They are presented with TOS on first use

Exactly. So I printed it out, made the changes I wanted to see, signed it and send it to Facebook with a notice that continuing to provide me with service constitutes acceptance.

I didn't really do this, but it seems like it should be as legally binding as a click through EULA.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#212

Post by coldcode »

saiya-jin wrote: post #90
smoyer wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I read that blog post when the acquisition was announced ... And laughed! While it feels like the (then) WhatsApp CEO was sincere, did anyone really believe that Zuckerberg would be a hands-off owner? Or that his public-only data content ideas wouldn't become dominant? I'll agree that I think this move contradicts his blog post but I also don't think the purchased entity gets to set the terms after agreeing to be bou…

you wouldn't pay 2 billion for messaging app with few hundred millions of users that is without ads and doesn't make any money to be philanthropic about it, would you (or anybody else)

20 Billion. 2 Billion was what it was worth. Maybe.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#213

Post by ryandrake »

bikamonki wrote: post #147

You can go get an off-contract sim card, use it on a clean Android, create a fake gmail account in order to download and install Whatsapp. Now you make connections (you add family and friends to your contacts) and start communicating. By now both FB and Google know who you are simply b/c other people in your network, not concerned with privacy, have you saved on their contacts list, pressumably under your first and l…

You could always, I dunno... stop using Facebook and WhatsApp and other software that you find harmful. I know, totally crazy idea. Just throwing it out there.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#214

Post by kbaker »

0xmohit wrote: post #195
bikamonki wrote: post #147

You can go get an off-contract sim card, use it on a clean Android, create a fake gmail account in order to download and install Whatsapp. Now you make connections (you add family and friends to your contacts) and start communicating. By now both FB and Google know who you are simply b/c other people in your network, not concerned with privacy, have you saved on their contacts list, pressumably under your first and l…

> You can go get an off-contract sim card, use it on a clean Android The moment you connect to your WiFi, Google gets the SSID and can relate other devices using it. Possibly (?) the SSID is also known to WhatsApp. Does it really help much?

You don't even have to have wifi enabled, even when Wi-Fi is OFF it will still scan for SSIDs to use for location by default.

You have to disable an obscure setting to get it to stop this behavior.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#215

Post by ufo »

dhimes wrote: post #179
thr0waway1239 wrote: post #164

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If this is true, then Facebook might find itself in quite some bother now or in the future. Can you provide a reference?

For some previous discussions here: duckduckgo whatsapp facebook brazil !hn

why not just provide the URL directly?

https://hn.algolia.com/?query=whatsapp%20facebook%20brazil

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#216

Post by danarmak »

TeMPOraL wrote: post #149
danarmak wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How? If the TOS text is displayed, and the user clicks OK, how can the service provider make sure the user actually read it, let alone understood it correctly? Should the user be required to correctly answer some quiz questions about the TOS every time they use the product? I don't think any users would agree to that, for any product. Do you have a positive example of how to do this successfully?

> Should the user be required to correctly answer some quiz questions about the TOS every time they use the product? I don't think any users would agree to that, for any product. Well, that's technically a problem of service provider. If you're afraid your product won't be used because of a complicated TOS, then... simplify the TOS. Drop the tons of legal bullshit, and stop hiding shady stuff in it. The more I think…

The GPLv2 contains 2400 words. The AGPLv3 contains 5090 words. They aren't enough for casual non-technical users to read and grok. And they can't be greatly simplified without changing their meaning.

Licenses are long and complex not only because they have "bullshit" and "shady stuff" in them. This is an unfortunate fact of life.

It's true that some services can do with much simpler TOS. The BSD 3-clause license is 220 words long (most of them in scary caps). But how short and simple does a license need to be to make the average user actually read it before clicking OK? My guess is most users would read 1-2 sentences. But some users, as soon as they see a dialog with a single "OK" or "Next" button or an "I agree" checkbox, will automatically click it without reading any text at all: this can be practically muscle memory for people used to next-next-finish installation wizards.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#217

Post by thr0waway1239 »

erikpukinskis wrote: post #204
bikamonki wrote: post #147

You can go get an off-contract sim card, use it on a clean Android, create a fake gmail account in order to download and install Whatsapp. Now you make connections (you add family and friends to your contacts) and start communicating. By now both FB and Google know who you are simply b/c other people in your network, not concerned with privacy, have you saved on their contacts list, pressumably under your first and l…

You can escape into noise, but it's work. Privacy is an arms race between information and noise.

That's a nice way to put it, but it may not be that inevitable.

Here is a very simple idea: next time you talk to one of your friends who works at FB/Goog/etc. ask them pointedly how they can work at a place which obviously lacks any morals/ethics. Their first reaction would be to defend their actions, of course, but if a few people start doing this, my guess is that the message will start going up slowly but surely.

After all, what are they going to do? Stop having friends?

Those are the words that the head honchos at FB/Goog/.. etc are telling themselves about the viability of their privacy violations. At this point, no shame in turning it against them.

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#218

Post by ryandrake »

logn wrote: post #105
0xmohit wrote: post #36

Quoting from the link: Facebook said on Tuesday, after the order had been issued, that it had complied with Europe’s privacy rules and that it was willing to work with the German regulator to address its concerns. Two Indian students challenged Facebook on WhatsApp privacy policy changes [0]. The following is what WhatsApp counsel told [1]: Using the messaging service is a voluntary decision, we have not forced anybo…

> Using the messaging service is a voluntary decision Once a critical mass uses a messaging service, it's not a completely voluntary decision, especially when there is no open standard with interoperable competing apps.

What did we all do in the past without those CRITICAL messaging services? Did people simply not communicate before IM apps were invented?

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#219

Post by ryandrake »

tw04 wrote: post #189
JoeAltmaier wrote: post #167

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm doubtful. With that definition, lattes should be made a utility. So should shoes. Tires. A utility is indicated by, requiring so heavy an investment in infrastructure that would be onerous to the public to support duplicates.

Not really... If all of my friends buy a Starbucks latte, I'm not forced to also buy a Starbucks latte just to interact with them. I could hang out with them at Starbucks drinking a Caribou latte, or not drink any coffee at all. If all my friends buy Jordans, I don't have to buy a pair of Jordans to join their game of pickup basketball. Heck I don't even need shoes (not recommended but to each his own). If all of my…

Or to call them on the phone, talk to them in person, send them an E-mail or letter.. You know, the things we all did in ancient times like 5 years ago?

Re: Facebook Ordered to Stop Collecting Data on WhatsApp Users in Germany

#220

Post by ryandrake »

adrianN wrote: post #122
corndoge wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is false. Market dominance does not transform a proprietary product into a basic utility. What I mean is that simply because a proprietary product has a large mass of users does not mean the users have the right to demand that it be regulated like a public utility.

"Using the phone network is a voluntary decision, nobody is forced to own a phone."

I detect snark, but it's a true statement.
Post reply on HN