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

Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

161–170 of 222 posts

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#161

Post by HWR_14 »

psyc wrote: post #84
lin83 wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon's attempts to get users to unwittingly sign up to Prime is one of the most egregious examples I encounter on a regular basis. As a European I cannot wait to see it gone.

After the last iOS update, Apple nagged the shit out of me to setup Apple Pay, for two days. No way to say ‘fuck off’ - only ‘remind me’. No obvious way to stop the nagging. Finally I gave them just the tip, and then pulled out before the money shot, and that seems to have shut them up for now.

I have no idea what you're talking about. Apple asked me about Apple Pay a long time ago, I decided I didn't want it and I've never been bugged again.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#162

Post by imiric »

einszwei wrote: post #62
tjbiddle wrote: post #25

> “Dark patterns” — confusing or deceptive user interfaces designed to steer users into making certain choices — will be prohibited. The EU says that, as a rule, cancelling subscriptions should be as easy as signing up for them. This is an excellent addition.

I am very tired of the cookie/tracking popups on many websites that don't have option to "reject all" but just "accept all" and "customise". Main example being Google Search. Looking at this, I am hopeful but not too optimistic.

Exactly. It's rich for the EU to regulate dark patterns when their own laws is the reason they're so rampant on the web today. I guess it's good that they're finally waking up to this, but they're so far behind what's going on in adtech that their actions seem almost intentionally slow.

The solutions to this aren't regulatory, but technical first. Monetary fines to tech giants are mere slaps on the wrist. We, and by that I mean the web developer community, need to make technical solutions that make it impossible for companies to infringe users' rights. I guess we should first start by defining what those should be on the web. Those solutions then need to be presented to lawmakers and companies forced to adopt them. This is not rocket science; there are already solutions to these problems that just aren't adopted (e.g. the {ab,un}used Do Not Track header).

All this "behave this way or else" regulation is just reactive, and usually takes years to even pass into law, by which point tech giants are way ahead of it anyway.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#163

Post by gbear605 »

rafale wrote: post #146
Epa095 wrote: post #136

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see how it's hypocritical to give democratically elected governments different possibilities that random private companies. It's government's job to put constraints on companies, stopping them from becoming the absolute assholes they become if they have no limitations. That does not make them authoritarian.

The tyranny of majority is a real threat. Power should be "shared" (or under contention). Companies just want to take your cash, governments can take your freedom.

We live in a society with money is inherently connected to the freedoms you have, and companies want to draw you in so that you have to use their product. Basically every job that doesn’t require a bachelor’s degree nowadays requires you to have a cellphone to communicate with them. So if you don’t have a cellphone (so realistically being under the control of Apple or Google) and you don’t have the qualifications to get a college degree, you can’t get a job.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#164

Post by jholman »

wrboyce wrote: post #96
psyc wrote: post #91

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Windows regularly tries to nag me into free features I don’t want too. At no time has the term ‘dark pattern’ ever been necessarily dependent on getting you to pay money. Your argument is that I sound stupid, so I must be wrong? There’s no button. https://www.cultofmac.com/538999/apple-under-fire-apple-pay-... https://www.wsj.com/articles/apple-insists-iphone-users-enro... My other peeve is when streaming apps put a…

Apologies for the implication you’re stupid, I didn’t really mean that and it was uncalled for at any rate. I don’t disagree regards dark patterns, your example just felt a bit irrelevant to the specific topic being discussed (Amazon pushing a paid for product / cancelling a paid subscription).

Paid vs not-paid is not an important distinction.

People who think that money is the only thing that other people want are doomed to be repeatedly exploited by people who understand that there are more forms of exploitation than directly monetary.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#166

Post by user3939382 »

tester89 wrote: post #126
daniel-cussen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I didn’t think I would see the day with a troll on HN. I doubt it’s an AI too because of the coherency of what they’re saying.

It’s against the rules of this forum to accuse people of being trolls.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#167

Post by dmitriid »

imiric wrote: post #162
einszwei wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am very tired of the cookie/tracking popups on many websites that don't have option to "reject all" but just "accept all" and "customise". Main example being Google Search. Looking at this, I am hopeful but not too optimistic.

Exactly. It's rich for the EU to regulate dark patterns when their own laws is the reason they're so rampant on the web today. I guess it's good that they're finally waking up to this, but they're so far behind what's going on in adtech that their actions seem almost intentionally slow. The solutions to this aren't regulatory, but technical first. Monetary fines to tech giants are mere slaps on the wrist. We, and by…

> It's rich for the EU to regulate dark patterns when their own laws is the reason they're so rampant on the web today.

No. The law is not the reason. Companies that knowingly and willingly break it are.

Those annoying popups? The vast majority of them are illegal under GDPR, which parasites like IAB are very well aware of: https://www.iccl.ie/news/gdpr-enforcer-rules-that-iab-europe...

Edit: changed article URL

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#168

Post by gerdesj »

tester89 wrote: post #126
daniel-cussen wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Quoted post unavailable.

I didn’t think I would see the day with a troll on HN. I doubt it’s an AI too because of the coherency of what they’re saying.

"coherency of what they’re saying"

Bollocks - spelling and grammar are both rubbish.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#169

Post by doh »

trevortheblack wrote: post #165

Six percent annual turnover for non-compliance seems too low. Should be six percent for first offense, 12% for second, 25% for third, etc. Until the company fixes it's compliance or becomes insolvent.

Fines are fine balance between motivational and liquidating.

I think 6% is quite a lot, even if one has 40% margin. Investors will be highly distraught and seek remedies from the current management. But for instance at 20% they will blame the regulators and push the company to fight in courts.

In any way, government wants to motivate change in behavior not taking companies out of business.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#170

Post by miketery »

TavsiE9s wrote: post #123

That's going to be interesting to see if the whole credit scoring industry will have to disclose their algorithms as well. Looking at you, Schufa.

My understanding regarding credit score is that it's one of the most regulated and explainable algorithms.

It's not transparent to the public, but it is auditable due to anti discrimination regulations. Am I wrong on this?

Post reply on HN