Red flags in the Threads privacy policy • Hacker News Board

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#51

Post by hnhg » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:13 AM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #49

mellosouls wrote: post #44

Tbh if you are concerned about the privacy and ethics concerns here the biggest red flag is in the subtitle: Meta's Twitter rival launched in over 100 countries today—but not in the EU Anything more is simply detail - if a major launch of this sort of service omits the EU we immediately know exactly why.

Not sure I buy this. Some of the EU stuff is good, I think a lot of it goes to far and it's a terrible nightmare to navigate now, never mind in a decade when we're all using software that doesn't exist yet.

Can you say specifically what goes too far? I don't find it onerous or unreasonable at all, but my business model doesn't improve by violating it either.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#52

Post by Moldoteck » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:13 AM UTC

mellosouls wrote: post #44

Tbh if you are concerned about the privacy and ethics concerns here the biggest red flag is in the subtitle: Meta's Twitter rival launched in over 100 countries today—but not in the EU Anything more is simply detail - if a major launch of this sort of service omits the EU we immediately know exactly why.

Imo it's about using instagram data for threads(following same people). Gdpr is not the case since gdpr is also in uk and threads work there

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#53

Post by TylerE » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:18 AM UTC

hnhg wrote: post #51

TylerE wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Not sure I buy this. Some of the EU stuff is good, I think a lot of it goes to far and it's a terrible nightmare to navigate now, never mind in a decade when we're all using software that doesn't exist yet.

Can you say specifically what goes too far? I don't find it onerous or unreasonable at all, but my business model doesn't improve by violating it either.

Right to be forgotten has some really nasty edge csaes.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#54

Post by renegat0x0 » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:19 AM UTC

e63f67dd-065b wrote: post #3

In my opinion, all the people complaining about privacy policies are barking up the wrong tree. As the saying goes in business, if you have to read the contract, you're already screwed. The reality is that the privacy policy will almost never be a determining factor in whether somebody will use a service. The Facebook haters on HN were never gonna use a Facebook product anyways, regardless of what the policy said, an…

Does that mean we should not anylyze programs if are user friendly, or hostile? Should we not check what hostile activities is company X doing? I read such articles and it gives me the idea what goes in mind of CEOs. This is the reason I have left Facebook. Such stories and comments have real world impact.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#55

Post by llacb47 » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:21 AM UTC

Terrible article. They linked to another product named Threads’ privacy policy.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#56

Post by epistasis » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:21 AM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #35

serf wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I sort of wonder about that, too -- it's not well reflected in their privacy policy.[0] An altruistic guess -- maybe another way for them to achieve geolocation if other methods are hindered? [0]: https://terms.threads.com/privacy-policy

That's a huge dose of benefit of the doubt you're giving to the Zuck. Do you for a second believe that granting the Zuck access to your Health & Fitness data that he will stop at just getting the information to geolocate you or would it be more like "let's just suck in all of the data we are given access to and then maybe at a later date we can use it beyond what we originally needed"?

I have an iPhone, I can see which apps access Health & Fitness data, and must in fact explicitly give apps access to that data. Threads does not have access to that data and I can not even find some way to get it to ask me to access that data.

So what are we really talking about here?

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#57

Post by yoaviram » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:23 AM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #53

hnhg wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say specifically what goes too far? I don't find it onerous or unreasonable at all, but my business model doesn't improve by violating it either.

Right to be forgotten has some really nasty edge csaes.

Such as?

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#58

Post by yoaviram » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:25 AM UTC

Moldoteck wrote: post #52

mellosouls wrote: post #44

Tbh if you are concerned about the privacy and ethics concerns here the biggest red flag is in the subtitle: Meta's Twitter rival launched in over 100 countries today—but not in the EU Anything more is simply detail - if a major launch of this sort of service omits the EU we immediately know exactly why.

Imo it's about using instagram data for threads(following same people). Gdpr is not the case since gdpr is also in uk and threads work there

The UK is working on a separate data protection law and the attitude towards privacy is very different from the EU (hence the rewrite)

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#59

Post by epistasis » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:32 AM UTC

blairbeckwith wrote: post #28

epistasis wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Stating that this somehow means it has access to your health information is just straight up misinformation. I don't even see an option to give it access to health information, which is tightly controlled on iOS.

Apple should really communicate more clearly what they mean in these privacy reports, because I don’t think it’s insane to interpret “The following data may be collected and linked to you: … Health & Fitness” in this way. An incorrect interpretation, sure, but not one you have to be dumb to make.

Why is Apple at fault for what an ad-ridden article claims without evidence?

Seriously I could barely even find the claim you speak of, when every other sentence is punctuated by a half-screen advertisement.

Why accept the claims of such obvious click-bait without evidence? There's no reason to believe anything said in the article, particularly when it's claims can easily be checked and shown to be false.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#60

Post by _cenw » Fri, Jul 07, 2023, 5:34 AM UTC

TylerE wrote: post #49

mellosouls wrote: post #44

Tbh if you are concerned about the privacy and ethics concerns here the biggest red flag is in the subtitle: Meta's Twitter rival launched in over 100 countries today—but not in the EU Anything more is simply detail - if a major launch of this sort of service omits the EU we immediately know exactly why.

Not sure I buy this. Some of the EU stuff is good, I think a lot of it goes to far and it's a terrible nightmare to navigate now, never mind in a decade when we're all using software that doesn't exist yet.

If anything, the GDPRs wording of "legitimate interest" makes it too weak, where corporations can justify every use of data that makes them money as legitimate until a court stops them, as happened to Facebook very recently over ad microtargeting.