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

FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 221 posts

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#121

Post by 4ntonius8lock »

komali2 wrote: post #93
4ntonius8lock wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It bother's me there are worse enemies. I'm still happy to see our lesser enemies be curtailed. Just as it bother's me that there are kids starving in africa... but I still donate to my local food bank. A worse evil doesn't mean we can't improve on other evils.

Sure but it does indicate an imbalance in the justice system. Remember when a gram of crack got you the same prison time as 100g of cocaine?

Could there be even better and widespread reform? Objectively, yes.

Is this a step in the right direction? IMO, yes.

To be clear, I dislike the FTC. But I believe power is corrupting in itself, so ipso facto the powerful will be corrupt or at least soon corrupted. That's why I want to see checks and balances. The guards of the guards... all lined up in a circle ideally. We aren't there, agreed. But I'll take any step toward that as a win.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#122

Post by makomk »

goodmachine wrote: post #42

People here missing the big win for Facebook, which is retrospective: The FTC settlement indemnifies Facebook for "any and all claims prior to June 12, 2019" https://twitter.com/ashk4n/status/1154027557055975424

Except that if you read the text he's quoting, it doesn't say what he claims it does. The settlement only covers claims that Facebook's actions prior to June 12, 2019 violated the previous 2011 settlement, as well as certain kinds of claims already known to the FTC at the time of the settlement. If they find out that Facebook has been doing other shady things that violate consumer protections the FTC can still take further action against them over it.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#123

Post by simonh »

jawns wrote: post #8

A lot of the terms of the settlement deal with organizational changes, but when you look at the very specific privacy restrictions that Facebook agreed to, it's really, really problematic stuff: * Facebook is prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising; * Facebook must provide clear and conspicuous notice of its use of facial recognit…

It's completely ridiculous that the FTC is in a position where it has to impose restrictions like this in an ad-hoc case-by-case basis. In this case specifically to Facebook. Maybe I'm being naive, but if these activities are violations, there should be no need for facebook to agree to abide by them. They would have to anyway. Alternatively if these are specific restrictions on facebook, doesn't it imply it's ok for other services to do them?

The GDPR has it's flaws, but at last Europe has bitten the bullet and faced up to their responsibility to protect consumers and reign in privacy abuses. It's about time US lawmakers got their act together.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#124

Post by gridlockd »

pyython wrote: post #79
zxcvbn4038 wrote: post #70

Does it bother anyone else that Facebook is being fined $5 billion while Equifax, a company with a history of anti-consumer activity and privacy violations going back decades, the company that congress was forced to enact the Fair Credit Reporting Act to contain, and who gave away all the personal information for over a hundred million people through its own negligence, was fined a mere $650 million? Do you get the i…

Came here to say this! I still can't believe credit bureaus are allowed to even exist. At no time do I give them explicit permission to collect my (very) personal information, there's almost literally no way I can opt out (short of not participating in the modern financial system), their interpretation of this data has an outsized influence on my quality of life, AND they have proven themselves incompetent at protect…

You did give them explicit permission by participating in the modern financial system.

That's why I keep saying all the hypothetical privacy concerns with Facebook's Libra already are reality with the current financial system. Equifax also didn't get fined because of what they were doing, but because they were negligent in handling the data.

Having said that, given the importance of consumer debt in the US economy, credit bureaus are indispensable. They aren't going away any time soon.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#125

Post by tkiley »

jawns wrote: post #8

A lot of the terms of the settlement deal with organizational changes, but when you look at the very specific privacy restrictions that Facebook agreed to, it's really, really problematic stuff: * Facebook is prohibited from using telephone numbers obtained to enable a security feature (e.g., two-factor authentication) for advertising; * Facebook must provide clear and conspicuous notice of its use of facial recognit…

> So from Facebook's perspective, this is probably a big win.

It does feel like they confessed and repented a few spectacularly egregious sins and bought a $5 billion indulgence for the rest.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#126

Post by slim »

rikroots wrote: post #106
goodmachine wrote: post #42

People here missing the big win for Facebook, which is retrospective: The FTC settlement indemnifies Facebook for "any and all claims prior to June 12, 2019" https://twitter.com/ashk4n/status/1154027557055975424

Is this true only in the US? Or can Facebook argue that the settlement with the FTC effectively indemnifies them across other jurisdictions? I remember there being something about courts in different countries respecting each other's rulings, but not sure how such an argument would play in (for example) the EU.

it's true only in us

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#127

Post by singron »

I decided to change the email address I have registered with facebook after reading this ruling and seeing the long list of advertisers who uploaded customer lists with my email address. However, facebook blocks me from updating my email address and instead displays messages like "Sorry, this feature isn't available right now"[0].

Has this happened to anyone else? Is there anything I can do besides creating a new account with the right email address?

0: https://i.imgur.com/4WEBAXD.png

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#129

Post by ouid »

blackoil wrote: post #89
djsumdog wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the proportional hit though? You need to compare the percentage/ratio of the fine to the companies net worth and also to their annual revenue and profit margins.

It should be based on no. of user impacted and avg. impact to each user. Revenue/Margin are should not be primary driver. We don't convict murderer/thief depending on their net worth (if any it is tilted on wrong side).

There is a greater impact to society than measurable direct impact to users. Facebook should be liable for their total net externalities, divided by the probability of being caught for such actions. That is the economic premise of the FTC. This should include fines and remedies for anti-trust violations as well, and since this is an opportunity cost, it does scale with the size of the company.

In fact you should probably subtract the direct costs to users, as there is already a mechanism in place for collecting damages, and any government intervention on this axis should go to something reminiscent of a victim's fund.

Re: FTC Imposes $5B Penalty and Sweeping New Privacy Restrictions on Facebook

#130

Post by AlexandrB »

blackoil wrote: post #89
djsumdog wrote: post #74

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What is the proportional hit though? You need to compare the percentage/ratio of the fine to the companies net worth and also to their annual revenue and profit margins.

It should be based on no. of user impacted and avg. impact to each user. Revenue/Margin are should not be primary driver. We don't convict murderer/thief depending on their net worth (if any it is tilted on wrong side).

This makes no sense. Violating the law should not be a business expense, it needs to hurt. If Facebook was a person the remedy might be jail time, but you can’t imprison a business.
Post reply on HN