Red flags in the Threads privacy policy • Hacker News Board

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#251

Post by g5revo » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 2:50 PM UTC

timmytokyo wrote: post #14

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…

Why should a social media app have access to the health data stored inside your phone? Why should we not be demanding laws to make this illegal?

I wish iOS would give us the capability to selectively toggle these app privacy permissions on an individual/granular level.

If I want to disable all the toggles and have a non-functioning app, I’d be ok with that. At least I could selectively enable the bare minimum and then have a more deliberate decision regarding how much of my privacy I want to give away, rather than what an app developer might be hungry for (and not actually need).

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#252

Post by goodpoint » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 3:21 PM UTC

mongol wrote: post #86

threeseed wrote: post #18

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No my problem with Twitter is that the quality of the discourse is poor and getting worse every day. Which is a direct result of Musk deciding to prioritise blue check comments over others. If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. And we see this manifest in many ways e.g. pages of laughing emojis in response to a tweet.

> If you're having to pay to have people listen to you then that means you typically don't have something worth saying. This basically invalidates all of advertising in one stroke.

As it should. Why, did you think ads were valuable information?

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#253

Post by superq » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 4:13 PM UTC

expensive_news wrote: post #222

superq wrote: post #198

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As soon as you do, you will accept (and can not change your mind later) the new terms of service (and privacy policy, that is: what this post is about) which also are designed to prohibit you from developing an alternative app. Just look at screenshots or videos of how it works to satisfy your curiosity.

Are you suggesting that the Terms of Service you sign when you create an account bars you from ever creating a competitor app? That sounds like it would not hold up in court. It would be as if Threads could be shut down if a single person on the team had once made a Twitter account.

Twitter doesn't have that provision. Most of the upstart competitors do.

Whether it will hold up in court doesn't really matter if you're dealing with a company that recently had a valuation of greater than $1 trillion who really just wants to make its smaller competitor go away.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#254

Post by DropInIn » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 4:30 PM UTC

dash2 wrote: post #214

that_guy_iain wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Your point is well taken, and if anything that's a significant understatement. This is one of the most significant protests (or nearly civil war) to occur in France since the Revolution. As someone from Europe who isn't French. It's just another France rioting story. It might be big in France but for the rest of us, it's just looks like another France rioting story which they were doing for the past few months. It'…

Yeah, but that may not be accurate. These aren't quite "just more French riots" - they have been unusually serious, violent and destructive. At least, the French seem to think so. (Though this might partly be because it's non-white kids from the banlieu rather than white gilets jaunes from the countryside, I don't know.)

It's very much racism

Essentially it's like how the average protest with minorities is treated vs Jan 6....

The former the cops toss tear gas, kettle them and beat them with baton and "rubber" bullets while the latter theres cops literally moving the barricades aside and escorting the rioters around....

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#255

Post by jojosbuddy » Sat, Jul 08, 2023, 11:57 PM UTC

everdrive wrote: post #226

xinayder wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

100% agree with this and the other post, the biggest red flag is "Meta". Whoever thought something good and user-first would come out of this wannabe Twitter killer is completely naive. I expect that federation won't last and there's 2 things that can happen, either Meta decides it's not worth it, or they will find a way to draw out most of federated users and then deal a killing blow to the fediverse. I was skeptica…

Threads will follow the usual tech trends. It will be enjoyable for users, and Meta will run it at a loss to try to defeat Twitter. If they succeed, they will eventually make it worse for uses to woo advertisers, and then when the advertisers and users are both captured, they will make it awful for both groups in order to maximize their own profit. It will become “enshittified.”

I figured Meta released threads now cause of the 2024 US elections: twitter has reached dead wood status for corporate/political/msm media, facebook hasn't learned its lesson in the eyes of lobbyists (no touch), forget tiktok cause of 'china misinformation incoming', streaming had it's run, Fox lost its main character (and a lawsuit) and nobody watches cable anymore. So where's that sweet $15B in campaign ad funds going?? Threads is being pitched as fresh and an alternative to twitter as well as "separate to FB"...so logical to release now as that the $15B flood gates open around Sep/Oct. I can already see those marketing agencies pivoting with a sigh on not spending it on twitter in a few months. But we'll see if this plays out by then.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#256

Post by 411111111111111 » Sun, Jul 09, 2023, 7:21 AM UTC

DropInIn wrote: post #254

dash2 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, but that may not be accurate. These aren't quite "just more French riots" - they have been unusually serious, violent and destructive. At least, the French seem to think so. (Though this might partly be because it's non-white kids from the banlieu rather than white gilets jaunes from the countryside, I don't know.)

It's very much racism Essentially it's like how the average protest with minorities is treated vs Jan 6.... The former the cops toss tear gas, kettle them and beat them with baton and "rubber" bullets while the latter theres cops literally moving the barricades aside and escorting the rioters around....

Pretty much all videos I've seen of the current riots (mostly filmed via phones from bystanders) in France show a very different picture then racism.

Even that unfortunate incident when they killed the teen was very much reactionary, as people have been throwing Molotov cocktails etc at them for weeks now.

Honestly, i do understand the perspective of the rioters. Not having a chance to improve your life would make me violent too, i think... But framing the police as racists acting out is misguided considering that most of the issues are social in nature and not caused by the police.

And this might be too nitpicky for such an emotional topic, but the term racism gets thrown around way too much. I think it's more akin to classism, as it seems like you're still gonna get discriminated against if you originate from the poor areas, no matter what the color of your skin is.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#257

Post by janoc » Sun, Jul 09, 2023, 10:42 AM UTC

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #111

janoc wrote: post #103

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think GDPR is pretty clear there. That companies like Facebook push fancy theories of what is and isn't legitimate interest is not the fault of the law. People will always try to push the limits to see what they can get away with, esp. when there is money to be made. That doesn't mean it will fly - like Facebook has just discovered (and others before them). Law cannot enumerate every single possible existing and fu…

There are ways to make this problem less bad though. You have your permissive case and then write a number of examples into the law that show what you do not consider allowed and invite future courts to consider them. Pre-emptive case law (which is a lot cheaper than actual case law), if you will.

Which is exactly what has happened. GDPR (or any other piece of legislation, really) explicitly enumerates some of the situations.

E.g. Recital 47 on Overriding legitimate interest:

"The processing of personal data strictly necessary for the purposes of preventing fraud also constitutes a legitimate interest of the data controller concerned. The processing of personal data for direct marketing purposes may be regarded as carried out for a legitimate interest."

I.e. Facebook is entitled to use your data for their own direct marketing (e.g. sending you leaflets, sale offers or telemarketing) to you according to this. We can guess how did this provision get there (likely the lobbying has been fierce).

Or Article 22 on automated processing/profiling:

"The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her."

Full text of the directive is here: https://gdpr.eu/article-1-subject-matter-and-objectives-over...

A lot of people make all sorts of comments on GDPR (and other regulation) but it is unfortunate that very few have actually *read* what they are commenting on.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#258

Post by janoc » Sun, Jul 09, 2023, 10:46 AM UTC

_cenw wrote: post #168

YurgenJurgensen wrote: post #111

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are ways to make this problem less bad though. You have your permissive case and then write a number of examples into the law that show what you do not consider allowed and invite future courts to consider them. Pre-emptive case law (which is a lot cheaper than actual case law), if you will.

It is interesting which special cases are explicitly noted in the GDPR (credit scoring for instance) and which classes of data are specially protected (political alignment, medical data) - and where the lobbying shines through by omission.

I would give the legislators some credit there. While it is certain that the lobbying has been fierce (as with any legislation) and that no law is going to be perfect and make everyone happy, it is a bit of a tall order to expect the lawmakers to anticipate all sorts of crazy business models and legal theories someone could come up with in response to the legislation and prevent them.

That's just not realistic, esp. not when technology is involved which evolves at light speed compared to the comparably glacial tempo of regulatory and legal world.

E.g. GDPR has been proposed in 2012, adopted in 2016 and fully in power since 2018. I.e. the entire process took over 6 years!

Where was e.g. Facebook or Amazon in 2012 and where is it today? What about siphoning of (also personal) data by various AI training systems - is that covered by GDPR too or not as they are not really "stored" in the resulting models? Not something one could ask the legislators in 2012 to anticipate, really.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#259

Post by rospaya » Sun, Jul 09, 2023, 12:26 PM UTC

Keirmot wrote: post #173

WinstonSmith84 wrote: post #165

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> interesting to see a big international company actually back up their "we just won't do europe then" that's the most interesting things to me. Whether: 1- Threads is dead in the water 2- They figure it out and makes the EU happy 3- EU is irrelevant enough to be ignored 2- still looks like the most likely 1- would be very embarrassing and 3- would be, indeed, an "interesting" development.

Let me give my 2 cents as an EU citizen. The way I see it is a mix of all of that, but number 3 is the biggest. Twitter is not big here. There’s people who use it, sure, but there’s a reason you don’t see that many EU issue trending on Twitter. Here’s an example out of the top of my head: France is rioting and it barely registered on Twitter. The biggest European market for Twitter is the UK and it has 19M users, the…

You aren't wrong, but Twitter's importance comes from who is using it, not the raw numbers.

Re: Red flags in the Threads privacy policy

#260

Post by epistasis » Sun, Jul 09, 2023, 3:28 PM UTC

dylan604 wrote: post #216

epistasis wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When you read "data linked to you" don't think about the store of health data that's *on your phone.£ Think instead of all the data that all huge number of advertising networks, like the one paying qz.com's bills, that have massive hoards of data about you, without your consent, that gets bought and sold every single day. This is not a trivial distinction! The health data on an iPhone is secure, and Threads is not ge…

> Five years after deleting my Facebook account I was ready to give in Because you became weak and caved does not mean the rest of have to give in as well. I have never created an IG account, nor will I be using Threads. I abhor Meta, and will never allow their apps to be installed on my devices. Your cavalier attitude about your data is your business, and my attitude is polar opposite. You coming in and trying to wh…

Your attacks against me are misplaced.

If you care about privacy, then you should care about the specifics of how it is being abused so that you can defend against it. So you should care that the health data is not coming fro, your phone, it's coming from the massive databases of information that Facebook/Meta and toooooooons of other companies have on you and sell trade and swap.

If you care only should maligning Threads, then continue to obscure the threat to privacy and how the massive network of advertisers is monetizing your health data against your will. Because bringing up laws about banning apps from taking your health data from your mobile phone, which is what spawned this thread, will only detract from efforts to improve privacy, because it would do nothing to 8pm rove privacy here.

So instead of insulting me and throwing around fake "white knight" allegations, at least try to keep up with the conversation.