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

24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

identityblog.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

211–220 of 222 posts

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#211

Post by dredmorbius »

kiiski wrote: post #165
dredmorbius wrote: post #140

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Above and beyond that, any non-trivial web architecture is going to involve multiple tiers of data and caching. A given text object will exist in the primary database, in its replicas or clusters, and in backups. If the outfit is at all legitimate, multiple backups representing frequent points in time, stored in multiple locations. A binary object (say an image, video, or audio file) may exist in its originally uploa…

But if you delete something from the primary database, then I would assume it will eventually get deleted from others too. While it might never be intentionally deleted from backups, the backups will be overwritten with newer ones eventually. (I'm talking about facebook here, not about the web in general)

That depends on how the databases are architected and tiered.

If they're proper slaves / replications of one another, then yes.

If, as is commonly the case especially for marketing data, periodic cuts or dumps of the data are made at various points in time, and there's no mechanism for propagating deletions throughout the chain, then no, you're not assured of deletion. This isn't likely to be the case for a site's primary database, but could very well be the case for derived datasets. I can think of instances with, say, credit bureau reports in which erroneous data must be repeatedly deleted because it keeps getting re-injected into the system.

Facebook's September, 2010 outage in which cached data were being re-injected into the system exhibited a similar problem of cache coherence. http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=431441338919

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#212

Post by anigbrowl »

AppSec wrote: post #198
anigbrowl wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rights are in European law. They're called 'fundamental rights' and are quite explicit. EU citizens have a lot of individual constitutional rights that Americans do not. They're fundamental because they can't be signed or bargained away, and the reason for that is to reduce the inventive of firms or governments to employ trickery to that end.

I really wonder how much of that is because the EU is made up of many countries and these countries want to protect their own. It's kind of similar to how the breach disclosure rules are significantly different from state to state. The other thing that I wonder is how much of the US not having the strict laws is due to Corporate Personhood. I honestly don't know, I'm just throwing it out there.

On corporate personhood - not a big favtor as far as I know. It exists in a lot of European countries much as it does here. A lot of the EU rights are rooted in the social contract ideas of Rousseau and the like, tempered by experience of war, the iron curtain and so on.

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#213

Post by jritch »

m__ wrote: post #205
jritch wrote: post #180

I think there’s a few points here and although some replies have very valid points others completely stray from the issues that "Europe vs facebook" is making. 1. Facebook has bases, and operates, in Europe. Thus they MUST abide by our data laws. This means that, under our European laws they MUST supply ALL information they have on people. Currently this is not being done and as such they are breaking the law by not…

> Facebook has bases, and operates, in Europe. Thus they MUST abide by our data laws. Why? One might argue that European laws MUST be changed. Pointing to laws is hardly a moral argument, there are tons of terrible laws and facebook might as well be a victim of one of them.

Why would a country change their laws to suit a company? (not even from Europe)? When Europeans go to america do they not have to follow the laws of that land?

As a European I feel that I should have access to any information a company holds on me.....both MORALLY and legally...

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#214

Post by jritch »

beernutz wrote: post #202
jritch wrote: post #180

I think there’s a few points here and although some replies have very valid points others completely stray from the issues that "Europe vs facebook" is making. 1. Facebook has bases, and operates, in Europe. Thus they MUST abide by our data laws. This means that, under our European laws they MUST supply ALL information they have on people. Currently this is not being done and as such they are breaking the law by not…

While I agree with most of your post, I feel I MUST point out some problems with some of the analogies you are using. 1) The analogy between hacking your phone and reading messages is really NOT the same as Facebook storing data that you supplied to their system. 2) Google did nothing that should be considered illegal regardless of what European courts decided. The data they collected was on OPEN WIFI routers. This i…

Point taken. They are still collected data they had no right collecting.....also the people who they collected data on were not informed until the german government investigated the matter (which is a breach of the law)

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#217

Post by m__ »

ltamake wrote: post #209
m__ wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook has bases, and operates, in Europe. Thus they MUST abide by our data laws. Why? One might argue that European laws MUST be changed. Pointing to laws is hardly a moral argument, there are tons of terrible laws and facebook might as well be a victim of one of them.

It's not about morals, it's about the law as it is right now. And the truth is that Facebook is breaking our laws and need to be prosecuted for such. As for your argument, why is that a terrible law? Why is it bad that users have a right to know what companies have on them? To be honest, I think it's a pretty bloody great law. Facebook is a victim of itself. If it didn't track users in the first place, it wouldn't be…

> It's not about morals, it's about the law as it is right now. Depends on the discussion. I doubt anybody claims that the laws don't obligate facebook to make the data available, because they do. What people argue is that said laws are bad.

> And the truth is that Facebook is breaking our laws and need to be prosecuted for such. That's what we are having an argument about. I agree that they are breaking our laws, but I don't think that they should be prosecuted. I think the laws should be changed instead, because they are bad.

> Why is it bad that users have a right to know what companies have on them? Because it isn't the state's business what customers and companies agree with each other. If facebook states in its contracts with their customers that they will make this data available then they should be prosecuted for breach of contract if they don't.

I'm against the state (or the EU or whoever) making laws that deal with private matters because lawmakers are notoriously bad at thinking things through. This leads to a bunch of unintended consequences and ultimately is bad for both customers and companies and anybody else. E.g.: copyright laws, patent laws, immigration laws, drug laws etc...

Actually, they aren't bad at thinking things through, it is impossible to think things through. http://www.nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/economics/laureates/1...

> Facebook is a victim of itself. If it didn't track users in the first place, it wouldn't be in hot water.

I don't want to defend facebook. Maybe what they do is bad, I'm sure that's an interesting discussion, I really don't know. What I'm saying is: Even if what they are doing IS bad, then the state still shouldn't intervene if they don't breach the contracts with their customers. Facebook doesn't force you to use their services, and if you do so voluntarily then it's on facebook's terms, though luck.

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#218

Post by m__ »

jritch wrote: post #213
m__ wrote: post #205

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Facebook has bases, and operates, in Europe. Thus they MUST abide by our data laws. Why? One might argue that European laws MUST be changed. Pointing to laws is hardly a moral argument, there are tons of terrible laws and facebook might as well be a victim of one of them.

Why would a country change their laws to suit a company? (not even from Europe)? When Europeans go to america do they not have to follow the laws of that land? As a European I feel that I should have access to any information a company holds on me.....both MORALLY and legally...

As a European I don't feel this way. Unless you have a contract with a company that states you such rights, that is...

If you give up information voluntarily (even if you aren't aware of it) why should it obligate anybody who collects it to spend resources on informing you what they know about you? Morally, why does gathering information imply obligation to provide certain information? This is a total non-sequitur.

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#219

Post by jritch »

m__ wrote: post #218
jritch wrote: post #213

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why would a country change their laws to suit a company? (not even from Europe)? When Europeans go to america do they not have to follow the laws of that land? As a European I feel that I should have access to any information a company holds on me.....both MORALLY and legally...

As a European I don't feel this way. Unless you have a contract with a company that states you such rights, that is... If you give up information voluntarily (even if you aren't aware of it) why should it obligate anybody who collects it to spend resources on informing you what they know about you? Morally, why does gathering information imply obligation to provide certain information? This is a total non-sequitur.

The reason this should be done as it is the law, pure and simple. I, by law, have the right to know what information/data a company holds on me. If they wish to collect data in the first place, and are a reputable company, they should be well aware of the "obligations" they have before then even start collecting it.......Why do they want my information? What do they plan on doing with it? Could it then end up in the hands of anyone who could do with it as they please?

Much the same way i wouldnt want to be contacted/emailed/telephoned/written to by companies i have in no way solicited to contact me....

Re: 24 year old student lights match: Europe versus Facebook

#220

Post by Someone »

sixtofour wrote: post #118
count wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But if you, as a customer of those websites, agree to them knowing you are there, and they chose to share that with others, what right does the government have to prevent that? Why is this not a 'just don't use the service if you don't like it' deal? Credit bureaus are significantly different - you have literally no choice in that manner; Facebook isn't providing data to be used in that type of decision though. If so…

"Why is this not a 'just don't use the service if you don't like it' deal?" Because that's the law in Europe (according to the complainer). It doesn't matter that you're free to not use the service, the law says that if you do use it you have certain rights. You're free to not use any service anywhere in the world. But if you do use a service in some jurisdiction, that service is subject to the law in that jurisdicti…

Get away with it? I doubt it.  The EU digital agenda states, among others:

"The right to privacy and to the protection of personal data are fundamental rights in the EU which must be – also online - effectively enforced using the widest range of means: from the wide application of the principle of "Privacy by Design" in the relevant ICT technologies, to dissuasive sanctions wherever necessary."

Neelie Kroes is commissioner for that digital agenda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neelie_Kroes#Commissioner_for_D...). Her track record facing large companies should be a cause of concern to Facebook.

Post reply on HN