131–140 of 255 posts
If i travel to the eu as an American does that mean it’s illegal to track me while present in their territory? Would I be able to sue them and which country would be most favorable for the largest payout if so? I’m happy to write their support team an email letting them know my intentions to travel (lol).
scandinavians are no different from other people, and changing the rules of advertising will not diminish Norwegian companies from wanting to advertise their goods. back in the 80's Norway had a ban on cigarette advertising, so Marlboro launched a clothing/lifestyle brand, blue jeans and other cowboy style clothes. With their competitors hobbled by the advertising ban, perhaps that was even more effective.
>scandinavians are no different from other people Household consumption as a % of GDP in Norway is 30% compared to 68% in the US. The Norwegian public sector produces 70% of Norway's GDP. You're underestimating to what extent these policies reflect real differences in how countries are run. In the good old USA Facebook et al are allowed to do what they do because people keeping those credit cards busy is what keeps t…
USA is 42% on the same measure.
If i travel to the eu as an American does that mean it’s illegal to track me while present in their territory? Would I be able to sue them and which country would be most favorable for the largest payout if so? I’m happy to write their support team an email letting them know my intentions to travel (lol).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not a lawyer. "If i travel to the eu as an American does that mean it’s illegal to track me while present in their territory?" Yes. "Would I be able to sue them" You can sue any time but only makes sense if meta does something illegal. "and which country would be most favorable for the largest payout if so?" If Meta breaks the EU law you would likely have to sue in the country were you were present. Could also b…
That is disappointing. What is the motivation for them to actually obey the law?
In the UK at least more often than not if I have a problem with a company, esp for some kind of utility, there is an ombudsman that is the first port of call over the courts.
The fines that the EU states can issue are very substantial % of revenue amounts.
In the case of the UK, which I'm most familiar with, it's probably a combination of the ico and ofcom which have the relevant powers to fine someone like Meta.
Context from the Norwegian article: Meta promised to ask users whether they want to opt-in, but they never did, so now they are banning these behaviours until they have come up with a better way of handling this. Furthermore, Meta wanted those who opt-out of data sharing to have to pay money, which is most likely not legal.
> Meta wanted those who opt-out of data sharing to have to pay money, which is most likely not legal. I really don't get this attitude. I 100% endorse everyone's right to uninstall every Meta app and never use them, and to block their on-page trackers on third-party websites with an adblocker, all that. But the notion that there should be some sort of EU-protected "Right To Use Facebook For Free"... nah. Using the ap…
Let me offer a counterpoint: if there is money on the table, corporations will get it. Example, you pay for cable, and still get ads. You pay for Netflix and still get Netflix ads in the app. All paid aps harvest and sell your behaviour data. Greed does not permit that money be left on the table.
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Nobody is opposed to relevant ads on TV (I mean, not any more than they're opposed to ads in general). it's the means by which they make them relevant. No one would be cool if Facebook sent agents to your home each night to rifle through your drawers to learn about you and "tailor ads to you and make them more relevant". That's the problem, the data-collecting and spying.
I don't get the analogy. Facebook is using data you give them when using the app. How is that similar to invading your home?
I wish the US would get its act together on stuff like this but it’s too busy getting campaign funds from such schemes
It's not just that; the US just doesn't believe much in regulating businesses, even if they're demonstrably harming society. They really believe "The Invisible Hand" will make everything better in the end.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>scandinavians are no different from other people Household consumption as a % of GDP in Norway is 30% compared to 68% in the US. The Norwegian public sector produces 70% of Norway's GDP. You're underestimating to what extent these policies reflect real differences in how countries are run. In the good old USA Facebook et al are allowed to do what they do because people keeping those credit cards busy is what keeps t…
70% seemed insanely high to me and so I checked this. It seems like the IMF has a similar (but not exact stat) that you quoted as 48%: https://www.imf.org/external/datamapper/exp@FPP/NOR?zoom=NOR... USA is 42% on the same measure.
"The public sector accounts for nearly 66 percent of GDP. The Norwegian government is the largest owner in Norway, with ownership stakes in a range of key sectors (e.g., energy, transportation, finance, and communications)"[...]
I wish the US would get its act together on stuff like this but it’s too busy getting campaign funds from such schemes
It's not just that; the US just doesn't believe much in regulating businesses, even if they're demonstrably harming society. They really believe "The Invisible Hand" will make everything better in the end.