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

Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

gdprhub.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–249 of 249 posts

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#241

Post by KronisLV »

jacquesm wrote: post #227
KronisLV wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe i could have also expressed more outright disdain for the practices of these companies in my original post. Then again, i think that the comment that you are responding to, despite its tone, has a fair argument. > If this is "suddenly" for your business, and your business still hasn't figured out how to not collect (and probably sell) user data wholesale, your business deserves to be sued out of existence. > An…

Oh, absolutely, make no mistake, I am entirely in agreement with the argument that you make, I'm just pointing out that the form is sub-optimal and not really in the spirit of the website it is made on. That said, I sympathize because I feel much the same way at times.

Oh, that critique is definitely valid!

I'm just making an effort to read past things like that and try to give the most charitable interpretation in regards to the arguments that are made.

Though yes, i also have a bit of an emotional response to seeing where this world is headed sometimes. :)

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#242

Post by malermeister »

charcircuit wrote: post #204
jacquesm wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is this, Slashdot ca 1996? Private information in fact does have an owner: the user that it reflects on.

Once you share information it is no longer private unless you put that person under an NDA or something similar. If you meant personal information then that doesn't make sense either. No one owns the fact that George Washington was male. It is just a statement that could be true or false. George Washington has no control over me spreading this information. Especially since he is dead.

> unless you put that person under an NDA or something similar.

Now you're getting it. We, the European public, have decided to put anyone handling our personal data under "something similar to an NDA". We call it GDPR.

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#243

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

nickpp wrote: post #159
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why can't organs be considered as a means of payment? Not sarcasm - I think that while it's obviously a different scale, the reasons are similar and boil down to "we don't want that as a society" and "the environment this creates is not conductive to a free and informed rational decision". Many people don't understand the value of their data and the risk it poses, there is an information imbalance, there is a power i…

Are you implying that my online data is as important to me as an actual organ?! Because it certainly doesn’t feel that way.

No, and I explicitly stated "while it's obviously a different scale".

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#244

Post by tgsovlerkhgsel »

jacquesm wrote: post #152
tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #73

One thing I'm wondering with these fines is whether they are actually "dissuasive". In particular, the revenue limit seems problematic. For a "normal" company whose profit margin is a relatively small fraction of revenue, 4% of revenue is huge. But for highly profitable large tech companies that make money primarily from ads, it may not be possible to issue a dissuasive fine if it is capped to 4% of revenue. Maybe "4…

The first fine, usually not. But that fine indicates that regulators have reached a level of pretty serious frustration at a company not doing enough. Second fines are at the level that you'll be talking about them in the board room on how you managed to mess this up so colossally. I haven't seen any third fines yet, but I'm pretty sure we'll see one in 2022 or 2023. And likely the company that is in luck will go rig…

My point though is that the maximum fines they can hand out, even for the third offense, are so low that they can't really give effective fines to some companies (unless they apply such a fine e.g. per user whose rights were violated, which doesn't seem to be what they're doing).

Grindr made a profit of $31M and a revenue of "well over $100M". The maximum fine is 20M EUR or 4% of revenue (whichever is higher). So assuming under 500M EUR in revenue, the maximum fine is lower than Grindr's 2019 profit. So if Grindr is the lucky one that serves as an example, I don't see how even the absolute worst case fine would put them out of business.

Although the max fine is probably higher than the 2019 profit from the EU, I could totally see that changing, and someone deciding that getting slapped with the maximum fine is cheaper than the loss of revenue from complying, especially if it is a business that is entirely in ads.

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#245

Post by hungryforcodes »

e0a74c wrote: post #240
hungryforcodes wrote: post #232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

WHERE should we do this?! The whole point to Grindr is that you can meet so many people online. It's not about replacing flirting, which you're suggesting. People flirt on Grindr -- don't worry. I think you need some experience in how the hook up scene works to really understand it....

> I think you need some experience in how the hook up scene works to really understand it.... I suspect you're right. I remember the pre-disaster Love Parades if that's any indication of just how ancient and out of touch I probably am! :D

I hear they'll have a new one in 2022. :)

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#246

Post by mabedan »

j_san wrote: post #2

The Norwegian Data Protection Authority imposed a fine of €6,500,000 on Grindr for not collecting users' valid consent for sharing data with third parties for profiling and advertising purposes from the Grindr App. Particularly interesting is that it is not allowed under GDPR to have a free version of an app with the condition that it shares personal data (in this case for targeting and profiling for ads) as the cons…

I wasn't aware of the rule against "Take it or leave it". Just yesterday I encountered a similar situation, visiting a popular German website (Heise online).

Screenshot of the "consent as a condition to access the service" https://imgur.com/a/neJya1e

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#247

Post by nickpp »

tgsovlerkhgsel wrote: post #243
nickpp wrote: post #159

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you implying that my online data is as important to me as an actual organ?! Because it certainly doesn’t feel that way.

No, and I explicitly stated "while it's obviously a different scale".

So, since you brought human organs in a discussion about data, what are you comparing it to then, on its scale? A toenail? An eyelash? Some dead skin?

What is of such great importance and I can’t be allowed to exchange it at any price and I can’t be trusted to make this decision myself?

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#248

Post by aidenn0 »

emn13 wrote: post #140
aidenn0 wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's also the linear no threshold model. The risk of dying increases linearly with the number of bullets you load. A different model suggests that very low levels are either benign or even helpful.

I can't find any solid supporting sources that provide any evidence that there exists a positively safe dosage, but even the linear-no-threshold models suggest the effects of low dosages are small enough to be hard to measure; i.e. which model is correct is practically irrelevant for low enough (e.g. 1-10 mSv?) dosages.

Presumably there is some level of radiation at which if 100 million people were exposed to for 20 years, we would see measurable excess deaths with the linear no-threshold model, but not with other models.

In particular the linear model treats chronic exposure as all the same; X amount for a week is the same as X/52 for a year.

Re: Grindr €6.5M fined for not collecting users’ valid consent for sharing data

#249

Post by emn13 »

aidenn0 wrote: post #248
emn13 wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't find any solid supporting sources that provide any evidence that there exists a positively safe dosage, but even the linear-no-threshold models suggest the effects of low dosages are small enough to be hard to measure; i.e. which model is correct is practically irrelevant for low enough (e.g. 1-10 mSv?) dosages.

Presumably there is some level of radiation at which if 100 million people were exposed to for 20 years, we would see measurable excess deaths with the linear no-threshold model, but not with other models. In particular the linear model treats chronic exposure as all the same; X amount for a week is the same as X/52 for a year.

Yeah, the linearity in the dose seems more plausible than the linearity in time; and I don't understand why the two dimensions necessarily would be intrinsically linked.
Post reply on HN