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

1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 110 posts

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#81

Post by eckelhesten »

brador wrote: post #71
eckelhesten wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I got a dollar for every person suckered into buying Samsung products… But to stay on topic: never! connect your tv to the internet. My LG has been offline for around 5 years now after automatically installing unwanted apps. Since then, I run everything via an Apple TV 4K which works way better than LGs own software does anyway.

Can a screen/monitor/TV send data back over HDMI through a connected computer or is that a 1 way connection?

Technically yes, hdmi supports transmitting Ethernet. Realistically no.

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#82

Post by rurban »

chrisjj wrote: post #63
jtreitz wrote: post #17

My Samsung TV which I bought 8 years ago now suddenly asks me if it's okay they share data with their over 200 partners. They have the nerves to headline this with "protect your privacy". Generally not a big fan of EU policing but I wish somebody sued them over this. > Improving Your Experience and Protecting Your Privacy on Samsung TV Plus > Samsung and our 264 partners use information about you and your device in o…

> asks me if it's okay they share data with their over 200 partners. L What happens if you say no?

If you manage to click through all >200 partners to say no, the TV startup will be significantly faster. Like 10x faster.

Cutting them off the wire and view through another dongle is easier though

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#83

Post by lII1lIlI11ll »

fwlr wrote: post #78
lII1lIlI11ll wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> making payments for non-tracking illegal This keeps surfacing in discussions about tracking. I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise or require you to pay to opt-out? Is this just an entitled leftie thing ("Elon Musk should pay for my Instagram!") or is there a genuine though-out plan for another reasonable business model?

I would have them make money by selling me products, rather than selling me as a product.

How is "Payed subscriptions tier without tracking" not a product? Isn't it exactly what Instagram offers in Europe?

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#84

Post by chrisjj »

rurban wrote: post #82
chrisjj wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> asks me if it's okay they share data with their over 200 partners. L What happens if you say no?

If you manage to click through all >200 partners to say no, the TV startup will be significantly faster. Like 10x faster. Cutting them off the wire and view through another dongle is easier though

Sounds like we need an app for that clicking.

Or maybe an extra smart remote.

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#85

Post by lII1lIlI11ll »

troupo wrote: post #80
lII1lIlI11ll wrote: post #76

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> making payments for non-tracking illegal This keeps surfacing in discussions about tracking. I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise or require you to pay to opt-out? Is this just an entitled leftie thing ("Elon Musk should pay for my Instagram!") or is there a genuine though-out plan for another reasonable business model?

> I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. There's no world in which a b2c company needs my precise geo location for 12 years: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1817122117093056541 Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and th…

> Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking.

Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following.

> Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and think "are we going too far?"? 1984 wasn't an instruction manual.

Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens while social networks definitely are. For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images in the post you linked because I deleted my account as soon as Musk completely enshittified it and I'm doing just fine without it.

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#86

Post by Henchman21 »

chrisjj wrote: post #84
rurban wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you manage to click through all >200 partners to say no, the TV startup will be significantly faster. Like 10x faster. Cutting them off the wire and view through another dongle is easier though

Sounds like we need an app for that clicking. Or maybe an extra smart remote.

How about open source firmware to replace the crap Samsung bundles?

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#87

Post by mzajc »

tomkarho wrote: post #54

These single click "informed" consent is akin to a bartender mixing you a drink with 30 different ingredients and hoping you don't notice they include cyanide and rohypnol.

I think it's closer to a bartender mixing you a drink with 30 (hundred) different poisons and hoping you get tired of saying "no" every time.

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#88

Post by eproxus »

anon48293 wrote: post #61

Just ban ads already. I don’t want ads. I don’t want to be tracked. I should have the right to never interact with either, unless explicit, informed and single-button-revocable consent is given.

Completely agree, the solution to so many privacy invasions and problems in tech is just because ads are allowed.

Would love to see a society where ads are not allowed. Cannot really see any downsides personally, but I’m sure many will claim ”how will companies survive?!” Hard to see it would lead to the collapse of either companies or society, but maybe of capitalism as we know it (which I think given the current state of the world would be such a bad thing).

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#89

Post by troupo »

lII1lIlI11ll wrote: post #85
troupo wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I'm wondering how do you propose for b2c software companies to make money if they can't either properly advertise Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. There's no world in which a b2c company needs my precise geo location for 12 years: https://x.com/dmitriid/status/1817122117093056541 Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and th…

> Advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking. Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following. > Why the hell are people defending 24/7 monitoring at scale that would make even Stasi or Stalin pause and think "are we going too far?"? 1984 wasn't an instruction manual. Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens while social networks definitely are. For example…

> Why are you so opposed to pay for a tier without tracking? I'm still not following.

Because advertising does not require invasive and pervasive tracking.

The better question is: why are you so happy defending 24/7 surveillance of everything you do?

> Stasi or KGB weren't "opt in" for their citizens

What you're proposing isn't opt in either. You're proposing "pervasive and invasive tracking, or pay an arbitrary sum randomly defined by the tracking industry". That is, literally pay for access to internet without tracking, or else. All based on a completely unproven assumption that tracking is required for ads to function. It's not.

> while social networks definitely are.

Indeed. Because tracking is happening only on social networks.

> For example, Twitter won't allow me to access the images

Here's a direct link. And no, this pop up wasn't on an "opt out social network". It was on a random site (can't remember now which one): https://pbs.twimg.com/media/GTe23o5WwAACyNJ?format=png&name=...

Re: 1,741 "informed" consents with one click? GDPR complaint filed

#90

Post by stvltvs »

eckelhesten wrote: post #19
jtreitz wrote: post #17

My Samsung TV which I bought 8 years ago now suddenly asks me if it's okay they share data with their over 200 partners. They have the nerves to headline this with "protect your privacy". Generally not a big fan of EU policing but I wish somebody sued them over this. > Improving Your Experience and Protecting Your Privacy on Samsung TV Plus > Samsung and our 264 partners use information about you and your device in o…

If I got a dollar for every person suckered into buying Samsung products… But to stay on topic: never! connect your tv to the internet. My LG has been offline for around 5 years now after automatically installing unwanted apps. Since then, I run everything via an Apple TV 4K which works way better than LGs own software does anyway.

Putting on tinfoil hat... how do we know it isn't connecting to our neighbors' open WiFi?
Post reply on HN