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

Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 136 posts

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#81

Post by troupo »

xvector wrote: post #77
tagyro wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I understand correctly that you consider facebook "social infrastructure"? I really hope the fog will lift one day and you'll see the actual impact of facebook (and others), here's one example https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-pa...

Just because you don't like it does not make it "social infrastructure." The world runs on WhatsApp and billions use Facebook to keep in touch with their family and friends. Instagram is also a huge part of the social component of the internet. The bigger problem here is that the EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it,…

> EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online.

You can still serve ads in the EU. Literally nothing is stopping you from doing that.

> If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it, everything from WhatsApp to Maps to YouTube would switch to paid-only.

This is a lie. And GDPR should be interpreted exactly the way EU wants it to be interpreted because it's an EU law.

> and as soon as they ran out of VC money, they too would need to switch to paid-only business models i

Oh wow. "Companies should actually be profitable and not run on unlimited VC money" is such a radical concept.

> The EU does not understand how to run a successful tech industry.

Where "successful tech industry" is "hope there's unlimited VC money so that we can keep running our 'free' business while harvesting all available data on everyone because it's our God-given right"?

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#82

Post by greyface- »

pc86 wrote: post #69
bitshiftfaced wrote: post #60

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Similar issue with Reddit's privacy "settings" last I checked. I'd uncheck everything. Then I'd go back. Some stayed unchecked. Some didn't. Go figure.

Could just as easily be malicious or just bad developers.

From a compliance perspective, does the difference matter?

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#83

Post by lnxg33k1 »

xvector wrote: post #77
tagyro wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Do I understand correctly that you consider facebook "social infrastructure"? I really hope the fog will lift one day and you'll see the actual impact of facebook (and others), here's one example https://www.afterbabel.com/p/international-mental-illness-pa...

Just because you don't like it does not make it "social infrastructure." The world runs on WhatsApp and billions use Facebook to keep in touch with their family and friends. Instagram is also a huge part of the social component of the internet. The bigger problem here is that the EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it,…

[flagged]

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#84

Post by xvector »

lnxg33k1 wrote: post #83
xvector wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because you don't like it does not make it "social infrastructure." The world runs on WhatsApp and billions use Facebook to keep in touch with their family and friends. Instagram is also a huge part of the social component of the internet. The bigger problem here is that the EU offers no pathway to companies offering free-to-use, expensive-to-run services online. If GDPR was interpreted as the EU would like it,…

[flagged]

How many "successful tech companies" have we seen out of the US in the past 20 years? Now out of the EU?

The entire modern world relies on US tech and the EU has no muscle or understanding for what it takes to run these companies. They are trying to regulate something they fundamentally do not understand.

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#85

Post by lnxg33k1 »

xvector wrote: post #84
lnxg33k1 wrote: post #83

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

How many "successful tech companies" have we seen out of the US in the past 20 years? Now out of the EU? The entire modern world relies on US tech and the EU has no muscle or understanding for what it takes to run these companies. They are trying to regulate something they fundamentally do not understand.

It baffles me that the US has been the nest of some of the greatest things for human beings, and now has completely forgotten itself, it baffles me that you had a guy called Kennedy coming up with this perfection https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FAmr1la6w0 And now you remember nothing of what he said, it is unbelievable that you're here only measuring the success of a company regardless of the effects it has on the people, you measure the success of the company by money, ok. I consider US tech company as the worst, as the most exploiting, depressing, cheating, dangerous, who serve no purpose other than the one of their shareholders. Do you own the definition of success?

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#86

Post by GrinningFool »

aspenmayer wrote: post #49
guappa wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

*hear hear

Thank you. The one that always bugs me on HN is folks “pouring” over something when they really mean poring, or to pore over something.

Right up there with "weary" being used as an unintentional portmanteau of "leery" and "wary".

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#87

Post by bjornsing »

xvector wrote: post #74

[flagged]

I don’t remember the details but the spirit of the GDPR is basically that processing of your personal data requires your informed consent, and service cannot be withheld if you refuse to give this consent. What Meta is doing (not refusing to provide the service, but charging for it) is interesting, but sort of goes against the spirit of the law.

Personally I find this kind of condescending: I’m not allowed to enter into agreements as I see fit because some EU bureaucrat wants to “protect” me. It would be much better if the regulators focused on keeping these giant companies honest, holding them to their own terms of service and forcing them to communicate those terms in a clear and transparent way.

(And yes: I never wipe my ass without checking the latest EU regulations…)

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#88

Post by pnt12 »

difosfor wrote: post #3

I also applaud this and personally would prefer to just pay for services instead of being the product, but I'm afraid this is not a popular opinion. People don't want to pay, at least not knowingly. I'm curious how this will play out.

I think the price point was meant to discourage people from paying. It's on par with streaming services, but with the content produced by the users. Do they get 200+ dollars in ads for the average user?

For example, I considered paying but I have a semi-inactice Facebook account which isn't worth that to me. I'm also not convinced of Facebook's integrity to honor the deal and not process the data anyway.

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#89

Post by pc86 »

greyface- wrote: post #82
pc86 wrote: post #69

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could just as easily be malicious or just bad developers.

From a compliance perspective, does the difference matter?

Not at all, malicious may even be preferable as that's easier to correct than "skill issue." But I would argue it does matter from the "$TECH_CO bad amirite" perspective.

Re: Meta unlawfully ignores the users' right to easily withdraw consent: complaint

#90

Post by hyggetrold »

xvector wrote: post #74

[flagged]

I wish we could ban this kind of argument on HN. It is so short-sighted and absolutely ignores reality for everyday folks who are totally uneducated about tech (and don't care to be).

It always strikes me as a 'caveat emptor' argument (Latin for "let the buyer beware") and smacks of condescension.

"Fuck yeah I'm ripping you off, why are you so stupid as to let me do it?"

Post reply on HN