Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
1–10 of 78 posts
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#2I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly.
But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here?
Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"?
Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have access to certain social media products, while they are also pushing for backdoors into private messengers?
I think that we should focus on the latter - privacy of private encrypted chats from Government scanning.
And not spend so much of our time worrying about Facebook targeting me with ads for iPhones, because they know I am in the markt for an iPhone. That's pretty meh.
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#3I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
More than one problem can be addressed at a time
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#4Good. Now do TikTok since we all know that is just as bad as Meta for their privacy violations as well.
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#5I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
norway isn't in the eu -_-'
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#6I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
This is utter nonsense. We have the capability to do both, we can both work to stop private companies from tracking us, as well as work to stop our governments snooping on us. Framing it as if we had to choose one or the other is misleading.
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#7I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
> Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have access to certain social media products, while they are also pushing for backdoors into private messengers?
Backdoors are from national governments (Macron in France, Sunak in UK). Privacy stuff is usually from the EU parliament, elected by people proportionally but cannot propose laws, only vote on them.
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#8I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
More than one problem can be addressed at a time
But you dilute resources and focus.
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#9I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
[deleted]
Re: Norway court rules against Facebook owner Meta in privacy case
#10I understand that what these companies are doing is illegal, and thus the court ruled correctly. But I cannot help but wonder if we, the public, are really focusing on the right thing here? Is "companies are using your reading history to target ads" really the same level of dangerous as "your government wants to read all your messages"? Why is the EU regulating privacy topics to the point were we no longer have acces…
This is utter nonsense. We have the capability to do both, we can both work to stop private companies from tracking us, as well as work to stop our governments snooping on us. Framing it as if we had to choose one or the other is misleading.
I don't think that the public is very good at paying attention to two things at the same time.
I think that the "ad targeting privacy" discussion is a borderline red herring that is focusing the debate away from what matters. Giving the public a feeling that they achieved something, while violating privacy through the backdoor.