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

Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 506 posts

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#341

Post by ricardo81 »

spoonjim wrote: post #333
ryandrake wrote: post #324

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> it's a lot harder for things to get seen. Here's something I've always wondered: I don't really get this obsession with maximizing the number of people who go to one's web page. If you're just a regular person who's not profiting from ads or something, it shouldn't matter. If I post something to the internet, I maybe send it to a few people who might want to see it and that's it. I don't care about collecting pagev…

Almost anyone who publishes something wants people to read it. The ones who don’t care how many people read their ideas don’t publish — they keep it to themselves or just discuss it with friends.

Sounds somewhere in between Plato: 'Wise men speak because they have something to say; Fools because they have to say something'

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#342

Post by tartoran »

xwdv wrote: post #302
ricardo81 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to put things online wrt technical barrier of entry and cost, but it's a lot harder for things to get seen. Got a popular page on Facebook? pay for it to be seen. Got a great unique website? Pay to be seen via Adwords. Website owners don't link so liberally as they once did because the link graph has been obliterated by "what people think will please Google" rather than linking to things they think other…

There is one place where you can guarantee your information and exchange of ideas is easily seen, paying little to no money. Comments. Comments are the final frontier. Why do you think I never bother getting a personal blog website off the ground? Because the traffic it gets pales in comparison to the audience I get from writing comments. This comment for instance might be seen by several hundred people, all within m…

If we do nothing about it there will be a time like that with comments interspersed with ads or not being able to read a full comment without clicking some ad to unhide the rest of the comment. Im still behind adblockers but am not sure how future proof they are

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#343

Post by toyg »

throwaway2245 wrote: post #188
Fl8ixIDN wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes. And that also means protections remain the same regardless of this move from Ireland to US jurisdiction.

Yes, for now, although it would surprise me if changes haven't already been negotiated with the UK government: Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg has been on Facebook's staff since 2018. Even without that, it doesn't make sense for Facebook companies to store the UK data in the EU/Ireland, where it would presumably then have to comply with both EU GDPR and UK GDPR.

That’s former Deputy Prime Minister, for the record. Considering his subsequent performance at the polls, a lot of people would further add the prefix “disgraced”...

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#344

Post by ricardo81 »

cortesoft wrote: post #338
ricardo81 wrote: post #318

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not buying either of the points, about romanticising or the portion. What means to do we have of discovering new content, right now. All the eyeball time on social media, all the searches done for the most part on Google. You've basically two methods of discovering new things when considering the sum time of everyone who might recommend something they've seen. That's not romantic at all to me! FWIW I don't think…

What are the two methods? I have received quite a few visitors from a Reddit post on the right subreddit. Hackernews posts generate a lot of traffic. You can also advertise on a number of platforms.

The two methods are the social and search portals that command the majority of time that Western world people spend their time on.

I'm not saying that reddit or HN aren't dead ends but we're talking about the main arteries of information discovery. I'm sure we can agree the general populous don't have the nous to regularly visit HN or subscribe to relevant subreddits, the question is how do they find their information and conclusions.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#345

Post by Razengan »

ricardo81 wrote: post #185
hypertele-Xii wrote: post #23

Free exchange among peoples is alive and well. It is easier today to make a website and share anything than it has ever been in the history of civilization. All this is is the reining in of a few greedy corporations that offer information-sharing platforms in exchange for exploitation. New communities will pop up, and old ones resurface.

It's easier to put things online wrt technical barrier of entry and cost, but it's a lot harder for things to get seen. Got a popular page on Facebook? pay for it to be seen. Got a great unique website? Pay to be seen via Adwords. Website owners don't link so liberally as they once did because the link graph has been obliterated by "what people think will please Google" rather than linking to things they think other…

> It's easier to put things online wrt technical barrier of entry and cost, but it's a lot harder for things to get seen.

On the other hand it can be too easy for too many people to be seen: spam.

Which makes you wish for more curated and controlled platforms.

And that’s why we have moderators and upvotes and downvotes.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#346

Post by ricardo81 »

xwdv wrote: post #302
ricardo81 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to put things online wrt technical barrier of entry and cost, but it's a lot harder for things to get seen. Got a popular page on Facebook? pay for it to be seen. Got a great unique website? Pay to be seen via Adwords. Website owners don't link so liberally as they once did because the link graph has been obliterated by "what people think will please Google" rather than linking to things they think other…

There is one place where you can guarantee your information and exchange of ideas is easily seen, paying little to no money. Comments. Comments are the final frontier. Why do you think I never bother getting a personal blog website off the ground? Because the traffic it gets pales in comparison to the audience I get from writing comments. This comment for instance might be seen by several hundred people, all within m…

I get what you're saying, because you might have a lot to say about topics in comment sections where it matters and in topics you know a lot about.

But there's some comment sections where you say something and it gets filtered out. What say you after this? I'm sure you're aware of shadow banning/filtering, which YouTube at least does, perhaps other large platforms.

Maybe a case in point. There was a referendum in Scotland about independence from the UK. There was a very prominent blog ranked in Google regarding the question of aye/nay, but you found that the comments were moderated towards one disposition.

If all the funnels point to that information source, the comments are almost useless, especially so if they're curated towards one conclusion. We're relying on a middle man (or many middle men) offering a variety of conclusions which we should reach ourselves, rather than one hand delivered to us by one or two algorithms and/or social engineering.

Diversity, basically, not just in results, but opinions and conclusions.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#347

Post by cambalache »

taurath wrote: post #323
cambalache wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> How many families have been split because of Facebook radicalization of conservatives? Mine for one. I am willing to bet your family is saying the same thing but calling it "radicalization of liberals" it works both ways

That’s how they justify it, certainly. That’s also how they justify cheering for violence. Anti vaxxers and people wanting police dept reform aren’t the same as the people who want and are preparing for a second civil war

Or how a section of liberals want to defund/disband the police, tear down any link with the past(if the past involves a white male), cancel everybody to the right of Biden and so on. Again, it works both ways.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#348

Post by Can_Not »

treeman79 wrote: post #96
harry8 wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is called "Regulatory Capture" and is a form of corruption. It is not /why/ regulation exists any more than the murder of Mr Floyd is why police exist. Regulatory capture is utterly rampant right now and a huge threat to democracy. This is true regardless of one's personal politics or beliefs about big vs small government or political party of preference. It's a cancer and more dangerous than people think.

Vote for people that want to reduce regulations. They’re easy to spot as news/entertainment all mocks them for being “mean” There is also the plainspeak people. Law written so that average people can understand them. Lawyers less needed.

> Vote for people that want to reduce regulations.

But those are the people who are usually focused on removing consumer protections more so than removing regulations based in corruption.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#349

Post by annadane »

laumars wrote: post #210
yarg wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is people expect all things to be free (beer). Naturally there's a cost to all things: developers need to eat; they need a work/life balance. Unless there's financial backing for a concept or project it will have a hard time getting off the ground. And unless there's some corporate interest in what's being worked on it simply won't be written. The best hope is open-source outreach not as benevolence, but…

> The problem is people expect all things to be free (beer). That may be true, but few people ask the follow up question “why do people expect things to be free?” The answer is usually because companies like Google had pulled a bait-and-switch of sorts where they offered a service for free long before they made a commercial business of people’s profiles. They set this expectation of free themselves. And you can’t rea…

Yeah, this is the answer. Absolutely correct

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#350

Post by cratermoon »

cortesoft wrote: post #236
ricardo81 wrote: post #185

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's easier to put things online wrt technical barrier of entry and cost, but it's a lot harder for things to get seen. Got a popular page on Facebook? pay for it to be seen. Got a great unique website? Pay to be seen via Adwords. Website owners don't link so liberally as they once did because the link graph has been obliterated by "what people think will please Google" rather than linking to things they think other…

How would you have been able to get people to see your great unique website 20 years ago? I don't remember it being easy to get a large audience at any point in the internet's history.

I had a website back in the late 90s/early 2000s that was one of the most popular sites for its niche (at the time) topic. It was on several topical Webrings and got noticed enough to get several of those silly thinly-veiled advertising " choice on the web" award badges.

If I brought that site up today as it was then I doubt it would show up on the first 3 pages of a Google search for the topic. But hay, at least you could view it with noscript turned on.

Post reply on HN