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

Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

datatilsynet.no

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

241–250 of 255 posts

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#241

Post by DangitBobby »

anilakar wrote: post #170
ralusek wrote: post #166

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s like saying that using a site with moderation rules is asking you to sell your right to free speech, or that going to a nude spa is asking you to sell your right to privacy. I have no problem with EU regulating what Facebook can do, in the same way I accept that some places might regulate against nude spas, I just take issue with the way you framed it.

Please dont bring free speech into this. As everyone very well knows, it trumps everything else including basic human rights in a certain country.

It is a basic human right.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#242

Post by seabass-labrax »

bluelu wrote: post #239
seabass-labrax wrote: post #210

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I loath Spiegel just as much as any other online privacy advocate, but I'd always assumed they were simply in violation of the GDPR. Can you provide any references indicating that this is the result of a special exemption due to successful lobbying?

There is a german artcile about this here: https://www.heise.de/news/E-Privacy-Verordnung-EU-Rat-fuer-V... Read the part about cookie walls for newspapers: Cookie-Wall soll bleiben Wer auf seiner Webseite unentgeltlich Nachrichteninhalte verfügbar macht und das durch Werbung finanziert, soll dabei Cookies ohne Zustimmung der Nutzer setzen können. Eine "Cookie-Wall" als Alternative zu einer Bezahlschranke soll also zu…

Thank you. If I understand that article correctly, the European Council is proposing a carve-out in the GDPR for newspapers. That would make actions of Spiegel illegal at this moment and until the European Council's proposed exemption is implemented, as well as being illegal in Britain, where the GDPR was implemented originally but further European Union legislation is not automatically followed. Does that sound right to you?

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#243

Post by xctr94 »

alkonaut wrote: post #206
bfrog wrote: post #60

I wish the US would get its act together on stuff like this but it’s too busy getting campaign funds from such schemes

Yeah I don't think there is much hope there so long as corporations are donors to political campaigns (Something that still looks weird when I type it, but presumably doesn't sound strange to a US person).

Sadly, it’s not exclusive to the US. In Brussels we might jokingly dismiss the lobbyists and their think tanks, but they fund politicians just the same; but admittedly via non-profits and other more intricate schemes. I’m very proud of some EU accomplishments, but we’re mired in lobbying too.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#244

Post by pests »

tagyro wrote: post #160
pests wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But as you say, they aren't asking you to give up your rights (because of the 'or pay money' clause). You can just stop using it. If you want to use it and not give up rights, pay money. What is wrong with that?

I don't agree - you can't just stop using it. Given the size of facebook (or google, amazon, microsoft, apple etc), they are ingrained in our (tech) life in such a way that one has to invest a - not negligible - amount of work to stop using them. To sum it up: companies want to have "power", but without having "responsibility".

What? They are not a neccessity. You are speaking like technology is food and water.

I have family my age and older who don't never use Facebook and barely interact with technology and they get by life just fine.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#245

Post by pests »

piaste wrote: post #165
pests wrote: post #145

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But as you say, they aren't asking you to give up your rights (because of the 'or pay money' clause). You can just stop using it. If you want to use it and not give up rights, pay money. What is wrong with that?

The "or you can give up your rights in exchange for a discount" part is the problem. You can't buy a car by agreeing to be a slave for 90 days either. Commercial subscription services that don't violate your privacy are 100% fine, and incidentally, as xp84 noted, are way healthier because the user is at least a customer. (I dream of a day where companies spend $0 on advertising and instead all commercial websites and…

> You can't buy a car by agreeing to be a slave for 90 days either.

Sorta??? It's not like I volunteer my time to my job.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#246

Post by bluelu »

seabass-labrax wrote: post #242
bluelu wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is a german artcile about this here: https://www.heise.de/news/E-Privacy-Verordnung-EU-Rat-fuer-V... Read the part about cookie walls for newspapers: Cookie-Wall soll bleiben Wer auf seiner Webseite unentgeltlich Nachrichteninhalte verfügbar macht und das durch Werbung finanziert, soll dabei Cookies ohne Zustimmung der Nutzer setzen können. Eine "Cookie-Wall" als Alternative zu einer Bezahlschranke soll also zu…

Thank you. If I understand that article correctly, the European Council is proposing a carve-out in the GDPR for newspapers. That would make actions of Spiegel illegal at this moment and until the European Council's proposed exemption is implemented, as well as being illegal in Britain, where the GDPR was implemented originally but further European Union legislation is not automatically followed. Does that sound righ…

I'm no expert, but I think this was accepted 2 1/2 years ago and is already implemented?

https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2021...

Look here (referenced pdf in the above url): https://data.consilium.europa.eu/doc/document/ST-6087-2021-I...

(21aa) In some cases the use of processing and storage capabilities of terminal equipment and the collection of information from end-users' terminal equipment may also be necessary for providing a service, requested by the enduser, such as services provided in accordance with the freedom of expression and information including for journalistic purposes, e.g. online newspaper or other press publications as defined in Article 2 (4) of Directive (EU) 2019/790, that is wholly or mainly financed by advertising provided that, in addition, the end-user has been provided with clear, precise and user-friendly information about the purposes of cookies or similar techniques and has accepted such use.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#247

Post by jurynulifcation »

mjan22640 wrote: post #159
jurynulifcation wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

lmao no, you're either misinformed or a bad actor. when they start tracking me through services they don't own, when they retain data on me indefinitely and purchase other data sources to do entity resolution, when they refuse to let me see what they have on me and refuse to let me set policies on what I'm comfortable with them having, when they partner with Walmart and CCTV providers to spy on me as I go throughout…

Stalking and cyberstalking is a criminal offense in many countries.

Which is why it's wold to me that adtech project managers aren't hauled away in chains, as would be sane.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#248

Post by allan_s »

tentacleuno wrote: post #16
allan_s wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is that Meta collect so many data about you for that purpose. Data which then can be used for purpose we didnt accept in the first place. If you remove this kind of advertising you remove a big reason to collect and keep these data. "Why people are so vehemently against leaving their door open for the amazon delivery guy to put the package they ordered indoor instead of outside in the rain, they pay for a…

> Data which then can be used for purpose we didnt accept in the first place. The obvious counter-argument is that, somewhere in the 100(+?)-page ToS, User Agreement, EULA, Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy documentation, you did. We really need to make new laws to force companies to explain, in plain (terse) English, what they're doing with our data -- everyone knows nobody reads those documents.

the GDPR tends to disagree with that, i.e it's pretty clear

https://design.cnil.fr/en/concepts/information/

1. it's not necessary for the service provided (a social network) so it should be explicit opt-in

2. it should be written in an explicit and understandable way 3. the user should be able to opt-out at any moment

none of that are true with an EULA of 1000+ page long written in legalese that you can only accept in a block by checking a little checkbox

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#249

Post by stubish »

ralusek wrote: post #166
stubish wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What you are asking for is the ability to sell your right to privacy. Laws generally don't allow you to sell or otherwise relinquish your rights, eg. selling your vote or selling yourself into slavery or accepting licenses in conflict with rights granted by local consumer laws. Some things we don't want assigned a value that can be traded. The EU has decided that the right to privacy includes not being tracked on the…

That’s like saying that using a site with moderation rules is asking you to sell your right to free speech, or that going to a nude spa is asking you to sell your right to privacy. I have no problem with EU regulating what Facebook can do, in the same way I accept that some places might regulate against nude spas, I just take issue with the way you framed it.

Going to a nude spa necessitates giving up some right to privacy. You expect the minimum necessary to provide the service you want. But you certainly don't want them filming you and posting the pics on the Internet. This is similar to how the GDPR is fine with storing personal information required to provide the service to the customer, but not storing unnecessary information or using it for other purposes. Going to a nudist bar would be a choice that necessitates giving up some right to privacy, but giving free drinks to women would be coercion and probably illegal in many courts.

Free speech is always in conflict with other rights. You don't get to say whatever you want on a forum someone provided and deemed to be child friendly for example. Or rant about atheism and corruption of the clergy on a bible studies forum. Or commit fraud. This sort of problem is why free speech is not considered a right in many countries and instead a luxury. You get to say what you like but have to suffer the consequences. But your right to free speech stops at my right to not hear you. And your right to pay your employees what you want stops at their right to fair pay. The conflicts and the grey areas need mediation and government regulation.

Re: Norwegian ban on Meta behavioral advertising extended to entire EU

#250

Post by hulitu »

xp84 wrote: post #120
neontomo wrote: post #98

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…

> Using the apps inherently shares data with the company whose servers you're using. Don't like it, that's fine, there's only one correct recourse: Don't use it.

You are missing the part where the user does not know that his data (everything he does) is collected and sold on the open market. Just read a privacy policy. Nowhere is written: we will record everything that you send and your behaviour and sell it. They say they might collect some usage data and what you post and might share it to "third parties".

I would _love_ if i have to pay for this crap. But hey, i already paid for Android and Google is taking my data without any shame, so i'm skeptical that this will bring an improvement.

Post reply on HN