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

Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

news.bloomberglaw.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–146 of 146 posts

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#141

Post by blub »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #83
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this theory is that it doesn't align with facts. Google and most of the other major tech companies don't actually sell user data. They collect it to use internally. The biggest companies who actually do that are the ISPs, but that doesn't really fit the same narrative, and I doubt they donate a lot to privacy groups. The reason a lot of privacy groups don't try to restrict selling user data is a comb…

>Google and most of the other major tech companies don't actually sell user data. They collect it to use internally. Why do so many people think that these companies sell your data?

Maybe it's because it's dangled as a red herring all the time when in fact it is barely relevant whether Google & co sell your data.

The fact that they collect it in the first place is the real problem. And when they inevitably get hacked and lose the data (happened), or leak the data (happened), or their employees inappropriately access the data (happened), or they hand it over to whatever government after putting up a token fight (happened)... it doesn't matter one bit.

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#142

Post by mic47 »

brtt wrote: post #105
AnthonyMouse wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem with this theory is that it doesn't align with facts. Google and most of the other major tech companies don't actually sell user data. They collect it to use internally. The biggest companies who actually do that are the ISPs, but that doesn't really fit the same narrative, and I doubt they donate a lot to privacy groups. The reason a lot of privacy groups don't try to restrict selling user data is a comb…

Ehhh, the 'collect it to use internally' is a bit inaccurate. While not literally saying 'here buyer is user data that we are offering to sell you' Facebook, Google, and every other platform do sell user-derived data to advertisers in the form of native audiences or other targeting products. 'Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Here's a list of profiles to target that have checked into a U…

"Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Here's a list of profiles to target that have checked into a Uniqlo three times in the past 6 weeks"

No, this is not true. It's more like "Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Give us your ad creative and we will show you to the profiles that have checked into a Uniqlo three times in the past 6 weeks"

Additionally, at FB ads, often it's custom audience, and in that case it's "Oh you want to to serve ads to individuals that shop at Uniqlo? Give us your ad creative and list of email addresses of people you want to target and we show them your ads." (though you can actually do "similar audience" and so on.

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#143

Post by CaptainZapp »

AnthonyMouse wrote: post #58
cj wrote: post #8

This quote from the article highlights the problem at hand: > Organizations like the Center for Democracy and Technology, which received at least $960,000 from [Google and Facebook] in 2018, are often quoted in the media as unbiased third parties and influence how policy is developed in Washington as such, despite receiving the tech company funding. > The group supports allowing tech giants to sell user data to third…

The problem with this theory is that it doesn't align with facts. Google and most of the other major tech companies don't actually sell user data. They collect it to use internally. The biggest companies who actually do that are the ISPs, but that doesn't really fit the same narrative, and I doubt they donate a lot to privacy groups. The reason a lot of privacy groups don't try to restrict selling user data is a comb…

That privacy groups stop accepting money from tech companies?

Yes; absolutely!

He who pays the piper calls the tune.

If you accept money from a company, which is actually completely contrary for what you claim to represent you're compromised. Period.

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#144

Post by Retric »

joshuamorton wrote: post #133
Retric wrote: post #127

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I target 21-26 year olds with an advertising campaign, and someone clicks on that add. Then Facebook just told me they think the person at the other end of that click is 21-26. From my perspective they just sold that information. With TV, it’s all vague guess on their part about what kind of content people like. Are the people watching daytime soaps can be 18 or 80, it’s vague topic and time of day based filtering…

If you put an ad, untargetted, with a bikini clad woman in it, you can be confident the person that clicked it is an 18-26 year old male. Google's guessing of your demographics is amusingly wrong sometimes (you can see the categories it puts you in). > With TV, it’s all vague guess on their part about what kind of content people like People with HBO have disposable incomes. People watching Nick or Disney channel are…

Google is not Facebook, and the question is what their selling not that the information is official. Anyway, I think you will find 17- and 27+ year old men also click on bikini clad woman.

As to Disney watchers, my male collage roommate used to love those shows. At the extreme end MLP friendship is magic has a vastly wider following than the original target demographic.

They both correlate with demographic data, TV is swimply wildly inaccurate and not tied to a specific individual.

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#145

Post by gnode »

throwaway35784 wrote: post #122
gnode wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google et al often stand to benefit from privacy regulations (e.g. GDPR), because they can bear the cost of compliance, while smaller competitors copying their business model can't. Increased costs in return for a stronger monopoly. It seems that's partly the case here: they want more legislation, but also want to make sure it won't hurt them.

Do you really believe they want gdpr? Or might they be more interested in keeping it out of America? I see no evidence they care about people's privacy, rather the opposite is intrinsic to their business model.

> Do you really believe they want gdpr?

It's not ideal for them, but I believe it benefits their monopoly position. Implementing the technical and compliance measures required by the GDPR is trivial at the scale of Google, but a significant barrier to entry for smaller competitors.

I don't believe they care about people's privacy either, but it's a noble cause to be exploited. I think what they really want is regulatory hurdles that stifle competition, but have no real impact on their business.

I expect they want to shape emerging legislation to include the likes of: appoint a dedicated data protection officer; have a process by which customers can request their data; produce quarterly reports. Things which place a proportionately larger burden on smaller businesses (which perhaps can even be sold to them as services), but don't limit the collection or processing of data.

Re: Facebook, Google Fund Nonprofits Shaping Privacy Debate

#146

Post by edmundsauto »

brtt wrote: post #129
edmundsauto wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's more than a semantic difference. Buying user data means you are purchasing data. That is not what is happening here. When you purchase data, it can be remixed and resold, can be used outside the original terms of service agreed to between FB/Google and their users. This is difficult to enforce agreed upon protections, and is a troubling issue (e.g. Cambridge Analytica had user data they used in a "clearly wrong"…

Who is the hypothetical you in the second to last paragraph? You are assuming one scenario, that of a brand or agency planner, who is creating a media plan with audience builder or w/e the name is these days. Saying or assuming that no tech companies sell user data is disingenuous. Case in point, doesn't Edmunds have an exclusive data contract to share data with Oracle Data Cloud?

An advertiser, in the 2nd to last paragraph. I'm only assuming the facts in evidence -- that FB and Google aren't selling user data. They sell advertisements, which use user data for targeting via generally broad mechanisms or 1st party data.

Re-reading my comment, I don't think I said anything about companies in general.

Post reply on HN