51–60 of 202 posts
Drop in an ocean. Should've done 5% of annual revenue. That would send a much bigger message.
perhaps. but guess who gets to pay that fine? it sure will not be phone companies. it will be in your next bill.
Drop in an ocean. Should've done 5% of annual revenue. That would send a much bigger message.
perhaps. but guess who gets to pay that fine? it sure will not be phone companies. it will be in your next bill.
I'm not seeing anything here preventing the carriers from just adding "sharing location data" to the EULA / privacy policy that no one reads and continuing on - now with "consent". Without a requirement to offer a separate opt-out, this just seems like a temporary road bump that changes nothing in the long run.
why don't they fine them for delivering spam? like $1 per instance or something motivating?
The core issue is transparency. I don't want to see a 'privacy policy', I want to see who a company has sold/given my information to and what limitations that sale has. The concept is simple. If you collect anything about me and allow some other entity access, you tell me about it/make it easy for me to see -and- block. Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on.
> Most of this abuse of personal data would go away if people knew it was going on. GDPR proves this wrong. Most people click OK/accept even in front of relatively clear information (to be fair sometimes the options are "accept for you to be tracked and shared with 'our partners' or pay a subscription/fee", which is an easy choice for many.
"well, I'm not sure if they're going to start collecting or using my data, because I don't actually really KNOW that or the extent of everything, just an email from them with a vague update to an equally vague privacy policy that I apparently implicitly agree to if I don't discontinue using their service."
Just like a manufacturer/seller on say, amazon shouldn't be able to revise their product with cheaper quality under the same model number (and yet it happens all the time), changes to the agreement of a service should be treated as a new service.
Whatever the solution, it should be a big enough deal that it cannot be implicitly agreed to, and clear enough language (maybe vetted by a third party review of the agreement) to communicate to all users, what is at stake and how, to which third parties, etc.
Cape dials up $61M from A16Z and more for mobile service without personal data
2 points by jseliger | April 18 2024
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40080673
https://techcrunch.com/2024/04/18/cape-dials-up-61m-from-a16...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It was a first time warning. If they don't reform they can get hit with repeated fines that are larger.
Fining them after several years of the bad behavior doesn't un-share the data, which means even the "first time warning" should be painful enough so that they don't chance it next time. If the fines are cheap, companies have every motivation to try and see if they get away with shady or even knowingly illegal behavior - if not, the fine won't hurt too much and if yes, free profit. If the fines hurt even the first tim…
"Hi, my name is ___. I am asking you to support and, if possible, co-sponsor the American Privacy Rights Act of 2024. My zip code for constituent survey purposes is ___."
https://www.congress.gov/members/find-your-member
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/2024/4/committee-chairs-cant...
https://www.commerce.senate.gov/services/files/3F5EEA76-5B18...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Fining them after several years of the bad behavior doesn't un-share the data, which means even the "first time warning" should be painful enough so that they don't chance it next time. If the fines are cheap, companies have every motivation to try and see if they get away with shady or even knowingly illegal behavior - if not, the fine won't hurt too much and if yes, free profit. If the fines hurt even the first tim…
[deleted]
The bigger question is whether the fine was less than the amount they made selling the location data.
I feel that up to a point the fines do little in the grand scheme of things, as they will pass the expense of the fines on to us, the consumer.
The bigger question is whether the fine was less than the amount they made selling the location data.
I feel that up to a point the fines do little in the grand scheme of things, as they will pass the expense of the fines on to us, the consumer.