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

Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 285 posts

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#271

Post by TangoTrotFox »

gnode wrote: post #144
lumberjack wrote: post #68

>Foremost among these tools is enforcement action against companies that fail to honor their privacy promises This is the crux of the issue. The problem is that when Facebook asks for "location information", the consequences of this are not being conveyed to the user. The user might think, "ah they want my location for the weather recommendations and event suggestions in my neighbourhood". They do not realise how som…

Does anybody know what the legal situation (in US or under the GDPR) is for data derived from inferences? E.g.: if he visits this nightclub he's gay, or if she goes to this clinic she's having an abortion. As the subject never told you, but rather you speculated it, it could be argued you don't know, and you don't have to record it in explicit terms. It also raises significant concerns about the accuracy, and whether…

In the US personal data generally has 0 protections with a handful of exceptions like medical information. As the FTC's statement reads, the only possible issue here is Facebook violating their own privacy policy (stated as a privacy 'promise') and the consequence there will be at worst a very gentle slap on the wrist.

If not for the media coverage of this, Facebook would be unable to care any less. The media coverage though is driving the stock prices down and effect the company many orders of magnitude more negatively than any legal enforcement will.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#272

Post by CaptainZapp »

losteric wrote: post #228
prolikewhoa wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish the USA would stop calling people conspiracy theorists for critical thinking, especially as we see more what used to be 'conspiracy theories' actually come to fruition. It actually hinders critical thinking and is a bad path to go down.

America has three types of "conspiracy theorists" * Logically consistent in niche fields that could be verified if more information was public (Room 641A); these should really just be called "theories" * Harmless garbage ideas perpetuated by dumb people (flat earthers); these theories deserve open ridicule * Propaganda created by intelligent people with the intent of causing harm (Uranium One); these should simply be…

  * Harmless garbage ideas perpetuated by dumb people (flat earthers); these theories deserve open ridicule
Antivaxxers certainly fall into what you call "garbage ideas perpetuated by dumb people"

Those theories are anything but harmless, actually kill people and sabotage decades of medicinal breakthroughts, which saved millions of lifes.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#273

Post by whataretensors »

fogzen wrote: post #119

How were any of you damaged by Facebook ads, exactly? Why the outrage now and not before, when Obama (and everyone else) used targeted advertising? This whole outrage over privacy is disingenuous. It’s painfully obvious the outrage is about Donald Trump being elected president, not personal information used to target ads.

Not to mention the other side was and is doing the exact same thing.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#274

Post by 345655433 »

hodder wrote: post #3

Remember the delete Uber campaign, the Equifax breach, the WFC accounts, the Bank of America suits, the Intel chip vulnerability? The market doesn't. The market has a short memory, and FB is not going anywhere. However, there may be some welcomed changes in data abuse. With that said, I think the stock is a bargain today.

#deleteuber was extremely successful at promoting change at Uber. Travis Kalanick was asked to leave as CEO and lost control over two board seats. There was a struggle for control between two groups of external investors, the ones who wanted to carry on as before and the ones who wanted root-and-branch change, and the latter won. And, although Uber is privately held, its consensus market value is definitely down a lot since the campaign.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#275

Post by em3rgent0rdr »

losteric wrote: post #228
prolikewhoa wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wish the USA would stop calling people conspiracy theorists for critical thinking, especially as we see more what used to be 'conspiracy theories' actually come to fruition. It actually hinders critical thinking and is a bad path to go down.

America has three types of "conspiracy theorists" * Logically consistent in niche fields that could be verified if more information was public (Room 641A); these should really just be called "theories" * Harmless garbage ideas perpetuated by dumb people (flat earthers); these theories deserve open ridicule * Propaganda created by intelligent people with the intent of causing harm (Uranium One); these should simply be…

Yes, they are important distinctions. But the problem is how to not mistake one for the others?

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#276

Post by gnode »

TangoTrotFox wrote: post #271
gnode wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does anybody know what the legal situation (in US or under the GDPR) is for data derived from inferences? E.g.: if he visits this nightclub he's gay, or if she goes to this clinic she's having an abortion. As the subject never told you, but rather you speculated it, it could be argued you don't know, and you don't have to record it in explicit terms. It also raises significant concerns about the accuracy, and whether…

In the US personal data generally has 0 protections with a handful of exceptions like medical information. As the FTC's statement reads, the only possible issue here is Facebook violating their own privacy policy (stated as a privacy 'promise') and the consequence there will be at worst a very gentle slap on the wrist. If not for the media coverage of this, Facebook would be unable to care any less. The media coverag…

The issue with inferences is that you could use relatively unprotected data, such as location data, to derive, for example, medical data. The example of going into an abortion clinic and having had an abortion is an obvious one. In that case, does the law consider you to be handling medical data? Can you sell it to a third party simply classed as location data analysis?

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#277

Post by forgottenpass »

brlewis wrote: post #251
sgroppino wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't forget number of steps per day, resting heartbeat rate...

No, that's not included. Read the link. I do not speak for Fitbit, but I work for Fitbit, and I do not appreciate my employer being baselessly lumped in with violators of privacy.

baselessly lumped in with violators of privacy

It's not a baseless assumption that fitness trackers abuse access to people's private data. Maybe your particular fitness tracker doesn't today. That doesn't mean others don't.

And I am - for argument's sake - agreeing with the notion that privacy violation happens when the online service does something "wrong" with the data, not when the online service demands to keep their own copy, for their own uses, as a precondition to using the software.

History has shown that software that sends as much data home as possible can simply not be trusted with that data. Fitbit is one "innovation" or management team change away from further abusing the access to their user's data. I don't mean to coldly disregard the fact you trust your employer. But if I want an accurate assessment I can't care. Facebook employees trust Facebook.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#278

Post by brlewis »

forgottenpass wrote: post #277
brlewis wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, that's not included. Read the link. I do not speak for Fitbit, but I work for Fitbit, and I do not appreciate my employer being baselessly lumped in with violators of privacy.

baselessly lumped in with violators of privacy It's not a baseless assumption that fitness trackers abuse access to people's private data. Maybe your particular fitness tracker doesn't today. That doesn't mean others don't. And I am - for argument's sake - agreeing with the notion that privacy violation happens when the online service does something "wrong" with the data, not when the online service demands to keep t…

My employer was being lumped in with a currently existing privacy violation. I won't argue much against hypothetical future possible privacy violations. I'll just point out that web-based email, your credit card company, and whoever installs software on your smart phone overshadow privacy implications associated with fitness trackers.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#279

Post by igivanov »

bitumen wrote: post #269
igivanov wrote: post #261

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>prosecute someone for being gay (Russia). where do you get this outlandish nonsense from?

Of course just being gay isn’t a crime in glorious motherland, but promoting homosexuality is. That’s so broad that it includes being openly gay, or standing up for your rights if you’re gay. It’s sort of like saying that it’s not illegal to be alive, it’s just illegal to breath. Typically thuggish laws from a state run by its own intelligence services-cum-mafia.

Perhaps some research is in order before you start frothing at the mouth at evil Russia.

Only "propaganda among minors" is an offence but it is not a criminal one. Not sure anyone has even been found guilty of it in the years since the law was enacted.

Re: Statement by FTC Regarding Reported Concerns about Facebook Privacy Practices

#280

Post by dm319 »

lumberjack wrote: post #68

>Foremost among these tools is enforcement action against companies that fail to honor their privacy promises This is the crux of the issue. The problem is that when Facebook asks for "location information", the consequences of this are not being conveyed to the user. The user might think, "ah they want my location for the weather recommendations and event suggestions in my neighbourhood". They do not realise how som…

You also know where they live, where they work, when they are on holiday, when they are out taking a stroll in the woods... Even if you trust 'Facebook' with that data, do you trust a facebook employee?
Post reply on HN