Live data from Hacker News

Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

noyb.eu

231–240 of 443 posts

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#231

[flagged]

Good riddance. If technological innovation is defined by abusive power, privacy invading, data hoarding/sharing/analysis, then I'm just fine living in the stone ages where this is not possible. If technological innovation is creating software that makes things more efficient without tracking the habits of its users, then I'm all for it. You can have the latter without the former. It is possible. We just need people w…

In this case “whatever they can to turn a buck” = “showing you ads targeted to 20 year old males because you said in your profile that you’re a 20 year old male”.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#232

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I unironically enjoy non-targeted ads. Every time I see one that has nothing to do with my interests, I know that my meticulously tuned home network and browser settings are working.

How do you see ads if you've tuned your browser settings?

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#233

[flagged]

> It is the lack of a predictable regulatory landscape in Europe I disagree that it is unpredictable. It is predictably a bit more pro-citizen/consumer than the USA. That should not be surprising to anyone at this point.

It's predictable. General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) was signed into law in mid-2016 and came into effect in mid-2018.

That is two years to designate data controllers, processors, and a data protection officer, to ask for the customer's permission to collect personally identifiable data and implement secure storage.

I was working on a SaaS where personal data was the main kind of data we stored. It took two sprints and two audits to achieve GDPR compliance. It is now 2023, and Meta is still not compliant. No one can explain this away with "unpredictable".

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#234
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In practice they will get away with it because good luck enforcing those penalties on a company without any assets you can reach.

1. Force Apple and Google to remove the apps from stores. 2. Lowest effort DNS blocker to exclude the 90% who don't care enough to circumvent. 2. Let the lack of network effects and time do the rest. Sure, a few will hold on, and there will probably be a temporary "buy a phone with fb installed for 10000$" market, but given time, Facebook/Whatsapp/etc. will be dead in Europe.

Except politicians will have to come out as supporting a ban on the most popular apps that tens of millions people use every day. Which outside of HN circles would probably be unpopular (see how the proposed Tiktok ban was received in America). And have sites ever even been blocked for GDPR violations before / in which member states would mandating ISPs block sites on that basis even be allowed?

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#235

[flagged]

I went back and forth on downvoting. I rarely ever do and don't think it's appropriate in this case since you certainly, uhm, sparked a lively discussion.

What I would say is you take a, let's say, free-market aligned source, and present what I'm assuming (it's behind a paywall) amounts to an opinion piece and make a bold statement "It is the lack of a predictable regulatory landscape in Europe that keeps them from being a hotbed of technological innovation[...]" as if it's a statement of fact.

I could equally say "It's the lack of a common language spoken by over 300 million people that holds Europe back" or "It's the lack of technical sophistication in the US, a country that still relies on the paper check and has no open banking APIs, that supports a diverse market of companies. For example Plaid could only launch in the US and become a unicorn there because such a questionable business model only makes sense there" if we're in the making statements of opinion sound like immutable facts line of work.

What I will say is that, as an erstwhile European it brings me great joy to see the EU causing so many headaches for international tech companies in the name of consumer protection. Just my opinion.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why do you think legislation should be the one forcing that choice on everyone, rather than the market allowing consumers to choose? The issue isn't what we personally like or prefer for ourselves -- it's more about when we think it's legitimate to take away the right of businesses to experiment with business models, and of consumers to be free to enter into the tradeoffs they prefer. Why shouldn't a consumer be…

The simple answer to this and all consumer regulation related questions is information asymmetry. The service that wants to monetize privacy or other sensitive aspect of customer life is never disclosing information in a way, where customer would easily understand all the consequences. People do not speak Legalese, they do not understand technical details and they generally should not be expected to be experts in T&C…

This is orthogonal to the GP's post, which was asking "why can't people choose whether they want to pay for things with privacy" (paraphrased).

The solving of information asymmetry is a necessary precondition to that choice, but after you've solved it, why shouldn't you have that choice?

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think this is like predatory lending laws - you can be forced to give someone a loan at a reasonable price, even if you can convince them to pay way more. The same argument also works for voluntary slavery - I think people have the right to say "even if it's initially consensual, it still seems like an abusive business model that we shouldn't allow"

You aren't forced to give someone a loan at a capped price, you can simply refuse to loan out your money. The government does not compel you to loan, so it is not analogous. I get the logic of rendering certain voluntary transactions illegal. Child labor (questionably voluntary) & minimum wage laws come to mind. This is distinct because those laws don't require companies to hire people at minimum wage.

Yeah good clarification sorry, the price cap is the compelled part, not the original loan decision

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Child labor laws and minimum wage also made some revenue models untenable, and the world is better off for it. I want to live in a world where businesses can profit without having to spy on people. This is a good step in that direction.

I think their point wasn't the regulations, but the unpredictability of those regulations. It's hard to start a business if you're worried the rug will be pulled out from under you at some point in the future.

> unpredictability

The EU regulators have been remarkably consistent in their rulings. The GDPR is quite clear that tracking for advertising purposes requires explicit consent and an opt-out. Meta's case has always been relying on a very generous interpretation of the 'contractual necessity' clause of article 6.

The only source of unpredictability is the apparent collaboration between the Irish regulator and Meta - this is the 4th time in a row they've been overruled. Much like our overruled tax arrangements we're apparently bending over backwards to keep tech multinationals happy for as long as possible.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#240

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But why do you think legislation should be the one forcing that choice on everyone, rather than the market allowing consumers to choose? The issue isn't what we personally like or prefer for ourselves -- it's more about when we think it's legitimate to take away the right of businesses to experiment with business models, and of consumers to be free to enter into the tradeoffs they prefer. Why shouldn't a consumer be…

I think that legislation is the right choice when companies have proven to be repeatedly deceptive and manipulative about what they are actually doing. If companies are hiding or downplaying what their true business models are, then consumers can not be expected to make an educated or informed choice about which companies to support or use. When large companies with massive amounts of resources are also using them to…

So the solution is to use regulation to stop propaganda, enforce transparency, and allow consumers to make a fully-informed choice.
Post reply on HN