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

Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 384 posts

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#241

Post by blub »

mortehu wrote: post #131
henrikschroder wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign me up! The sad truth though is that the users who are most likely to pay to get rid of ads, are also the users that are most valuable to advertisers, because that's a signal they have more money to spend than the rest.

You can disable Google's ad targeting at any time: https://adssettings.google.com/ You don't have to pay anything. What you get instead is untargeted ads, like ads for cars, potato chips, and shampoo, just like on TV. Personally I find those to be a lot more annoying. Facebook's ad targeting can be similarly disabled under https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/?entry_product=ad_s...

So... I have to be logged in or have a Google cookie in order to not be tracked by Google. This is complete bullshit and worthless for anyone using private browsing.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#242

Post by zerostar07 »

MarkMc wrote: post #170

I think Facebook's lawyers have determined that they can use the 'legitimate interest' basis for showing targeted ads to their users [0]. This basis does not require consent from users except as part of the take-it-or-leave-it initial terms of service. Here are the parts of the 'legitimate interest' basis which are most useful to Facebook: The GDPR does not define what factors to take into account when deciding if yo…

I don't think they 'll manage to convince anyone that maximum profit can be a legitimate reason - at least not in the current climate. They can claim however that, since facebook's business is selling targeted ads (which is truly their source of revenue), their system simply needs user's data to work.

I believe that facebook DID ask about permission with its terms pop-up that i saw on the web. In any case however, any complaint against facebook will be judged emotionally at this time, so the details may matter less.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#243

Post by saiya-jin »

dmortin wrote: post #58
ckastner wrote: post #6

> "The GDPR explicitly allows any data processing that is strictly necessary for the service - but using the data additionally for advertisement or to sell it on needs the users' free opt-in consent" This is the key point. As the saying goes, on Facebook, you aren't the customer, you are the product. The GDPR just changed this -- rightfully, in my opinion.

Somebody has to pay for it in the end, so Facebook could simply say "agree to targeted advertising and use the site for free or do not agree and pay a monthly fee for the site".

I, and I believe most of the world too, would be perfectly fine with Facebook valuation of say 1 billion $. Then you don't need so much income to sustain/be profitable. I mean it's basically the same website as before, just few smaller services and Oculus. They do scale a lot (with years of painful basic technical errors), but then again its just overengineered single page of news feed.

The whole valuation is on data spied or voluntarily given up from users

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#244

Post by codedokode »

ldjb wrote: post #138
rightos wrote: post #121

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm pretty sure that's incorrect at least today, it's possible to skip through the initial setup on a stock Android device without adding a Google account or accepting a ToS.

If there is, they don't make it obvious. Whenever I've tried setting up a stock Android phone, I've looked for a way to do so without adding a Google account, but found no such option. Perhaps it's possible to do so by pressing or holding some obscure sequence of buttons, but in that case it is reasonable to argue that a 'hidden' option isn't really an option at all. After all, you can't hide microscopic text on a pa…

I am using a chinese noname Android phone without a Google Account. It is somewhat useable even without Internet connection and without SIM card. For example, I can use a camera, radio, music player, a dictionary or offline maps.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#245

Post by turtle4 »

forgottenpass wrote: post #185
VMG wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The GDPR ensures that only Facebook will be able to comply, and prospective competitors shouldn't even bother. The regulation counts 58 000 words.

I love all these posts that assume because they've never been on a software that team that makes compliance part of their job, that it's completely outside the grasp of a small team. Those of us in fields regulated prior to GDPR are laughing at you.

Is that what they are saying though? I'm not reading it as 'small teams can't comply'. I'm reading it as if you comply, you will make less money advertising, and that affects the dynamics in a social app.

If you have to charge money, your chance to overcome the network effect of FB or an established site is difficult, because en masse migration of users to a new service typically goes hand in hand with that new service being offered freely.

Conversely if you don't charge money, your ability to fund the development of a competitor is based on reduced ad income since you can't offer targeted ads, which is going to shorten your runway by a significant amount.

These two things seem to indicate that the likelihood of building something that replaces one of the existing social services goes down. I don't think it makes it impossible, but the law seems to make it less likely that the social app incumbents get replaced (if that was at all possible).

As far as those in other regulated fields having done this for some time, I can't think of many regulated fields where the network effect is so high as social apps, so it is probably a bit apples to oranges. Presumably it is not as large a deal in those markets where social network dynamic is not as strong.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#246

Post by CaptainZapp »

mortehu wrote: post #131
henrikschroder wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign me up! The sad truth though is that the users who are most likely to pay to get rid of ads, are also the users that are most valuable to advertisers, because that's a signal they have more money to spend than the rest.

You can disable Google's ad targeting at any time: https://adssettings.google.com/ You don't have to pay anything. What you get instead is untargeted ads, like ads for cars, potato chips, and shampoo, just like on TV. Personally I find those to be a lot more annoying. Facebook's ad targeting can be similarly disabled under https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/?entry_product=ad_s...

Does this disable Facebook's data hoovering about you?

I wouldn't think so.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#247

Post by CaptainZapp »

dhimes wrote: post #186
xxs wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you are stipulating an account worth is 240USD a year at facebook? Instead of 20, why won't you say 100, make it round. Seriously though, behemoths do fall and if facebook ceases to exist there will be no harm but good in my book.

The number that's been kicked around for he value of North American user is about $50/year. So $5/month will cover it.

The problem is that even if I pay Facebook this company is so utterly untrustworthy that I don't believe for one second that they wouldn't run their data sucking shenanigans on paid accounts.

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#248

Post by friedButter »

lloydsparkes wrote: post #38

I am reading through the complaints, The first one: https://noyb.eu/wp-content/uploads/2018/05/complaint-android... The User sets up a "new" (non Google) phone, and isn't given an option to decline consent to Googles ToS. Now how does this work with a physical product? It needs to be compliant on the 25th of May 2018, but the version of Android may be old and not updated (given its Android). Even if there was an upda…

> In that point of view, it seems a rather unfair complaint

Regulations arent necessarily designed to be "fair" though.. if GDPR is written in a way that manufacturers need to recall all stock and update phones, its cost is part of GDPR compliance and a fair tradeoff for its benefits as per EU citizens

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#249

Post by frockington »

kodablah wrote: post #223
dvfjsdhgfv wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To downvoters: I'm curious to hear your counter-arguments. Yes, as a European I have more rights related to personal data than Americans. American companies can continue playing the same old tricks on American citizens with no consequences. It's not possible to do the same to Europeans anymore.

You were probably downvoted for your the absoluteness of your statement. For instance, you do not have more rights as a European business owner. Even as just a user, you have fewer rights to enter agreements now with these tech companies free from government involvement. What you may call rights, others call restrictions and limitations of rights.

Agreed. As an American, reading the term rights associated with increased government control is nonsensical. I understand the European viewpoint, its just much different in America

Re: Google and Facebook accused of breaking GDPR laws

#250

Post by Reason077 »

mortehu wrote: post #131
henrikschroder wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sign me up! The sad truth though is that the users who are most likely to pay to get rid of ads, are also the users that are most valuable to advertisers, because that's a signal they have more money to spend than the rest.

You can disable Google's ad targeting at any time: https://adssettings.google.com/ You don't have to pay anything. What you get instead is untargeted ads, like ads for cars, potato chips, and shampoo, just like on TV. Personally I find those to be a lot more annoying. Facebook's ad targeting can be similarly disabled under https://www.facebook.com/ads/preferences/?entry_product=ad_s...

"What you get instead is untargeted ads, like ads for cars, potato chips, and shampoo, just like on TV. Personally I find those to be a lot more annoying."

Really? I kind of despise the targeted Ads. They're typically poor quality, and often it's some website I visited months ago to look at one product constantly dangling that product in my face in a desperate attempt for me to come back and buy it.

Show me the cars and potato chips, please!

Post reply on HN