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

Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

281–290 of 443 posts

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#281

Post by Lio »

jefftk wrote: post #102
robin_reala wrote: post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And that’s fine: that consumer can choose to opt in.

Except they can't. If a service is only profitable with personalized advertising they aren't allowed to say "if you want to use this service you need to allow us to do personalized advertising". Which means that in the future if there's a service I might want to use which is in this category and if I don't mind having my data used to personalize my advertising, I don't have a choice: the service won't exist.

That's a bit like saying that motor racing wouldn't be possible without cigarette advertising.

It turns out that banning tobacco advertising did not lead to the end of Formulae 1 and making targeted advertising optional won't lead to end of social media either.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#282

Post by dylan604 »

LelouBil wrote: post #261
dylan604 wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not like they haven't been fined before, and continued doing shady shit. I'm sorry, but I have such a low opinion of Meta/Facebook/theZuck that none of this means anything positive to me. I am a much more pessimistic person regarding these kinds of things that I give no credence of benefit of doubt. I also don't trust these legally-binding orders as they are only legally binding until some sharp tongue lawyer fi…

From https://gdpr.eu/fines/ > The less severe infringements could result in a fine of up to €10 million, or 2% of the firm’s worldwide annual revenue from the preceding financial year, whichever amount is higher .

could result

NOT

must result

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#283

Post by jdiez17 »

somedude895 wrote: post #257
e_i_pi_2 wrote: post #147

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If the standard becomes "make illegal business models that the media gets enough people upset about" I think you're giving "the media" too much credit here, it's also very possible that the business models are actually unpopular and people are upset after learning about them. I think in general that's the basis for all the laws we have - a bunch of people thought there should be a law against something and made it.…

I'll preface this by saying that I don't like Meta and am very privacy-conscious. > it's also very possible that the business models are actually unpopular and people are upset after learning about them. I am 100% convinced - from people around me - that those who use FB and IG don't give a damn about privacy and would rather it be free of charge. This is clearly a small group of "elite people in the know" (which in…

Those people will be given a choice (assuming Meta doesn’t throw a tantrum and decide to leave the EU in Brexit fashion - which they are more than welcome to do!).

“Do you want us to use [extensive list of all of the kinds of information we have meticulously gathered about you] to show you more relevant ads? Yes/no”

I have a personal belief on what most people will answer to that question. You may disagree. But it doesn’t really matter - the key is that people will be given the chance to make an informed decision.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#284

Post by selfmodruntime »

crazygringo wrote: post #88
jdiez17 wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> This decision, as I understand it, renders large swathes of tech service revenue models untenable. To be honest, good riddance. If it is no longer possible to offer users a "free" service in exchange for extremely invasive spying and psychological manipulation (without explicit consent [0]), it forces companies to 1) innovate in order to offer such services for a sustainable price, and 2) encourages competition fro…

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…

> But why do you think legislation should be the one forcing that choice on everyone, rather than the market allowing consumers to choose?

Isn't that the exact point of legislation? Consumers had no choice in the matter, because Meta collected and sold user data even if you had no facebook / instagram account.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#285

Post by Dylan16807 »

astrange wrote: post #251
Nextgrid wrote: post #194

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The cookie banners are a result of bad/non-existent enforcement. The GDPR actually makes 90% of them illegal. Enforcement appears to be slowly ramping up. > The value you get from Facebook is the ads are relevant If this was true, this ruling would be a nothingburger because everyone would voluntarily opt into the targeted advertising so they can get all that "value" you're speaking of. In reality though the value pe…

> The cookie banners are a result of bad/non-existent enforcement. Unintended results are part of writing the laws. So is writing a law that phone ports must be USBC and forgetting about wireless charging standards. When the DMA starts enforcement and makes it impossible to block messaging spam because all messengers have to trust each other, that’ll be part of it too. > If this was true, this ruling would be a nothi…

> Unintended results are part of writing the laws.

It's hard to forsee companies wanting to annoy users on purpose.

> So is writing a law that phone ports must be USBC and forgetting about wireless charging standards.

What's the problem here? Wireless charging is already using a single standard.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#286

Post by spookie »

andsoitis wrote: post #244
cwkoss wrote: post #139

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Link those numerous studies, sounds like BS

One should probably account for a margin of error as well as different measurement standards as well as timing differences, but by Europe and the US's own governments, Europe has double the poverty rate of the US: - Europe: 21.7% ( https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php... ) - US: 11.6% ( https://www.census.gov/newsroom/stories/poverty-awareness-mo... ) So a very very generous adjustment would p…

USA's poverty threshold is significantly lower that Europe's. Comparing against median income, of course.

So I would assume poverty rates are roughly similar, indeed.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#287

Post by int_19h »

dcgudeman wrote: post #209
no_time wrote: post #179

As an EU citizen all I can say is: Get fucked. I hope the EU grows a spine and actually doubles down instead of bowing to US pressure. >Fine for Meta more than tenfold from € 28 million to € 390 million. Third case on WhatsApp pending. Starting to get into a range for the fine that makes sense. Give it another tenfold increase and I'm content.

[flagged]

The ad industry has succeeded in conditioning me to hate ads in general. So, let them waste money; hopefully the takeaway will be buying less ads in the future. If it means that some ad companies go out of business, that's even better.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#288

Post by dylan604 »

astrange wrote: post #231
dylan604 wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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”.

what profile? i don't use said platform, but they still hoard data about me anyways. so fuck 'em if they get barred from doing shady shit. and yes, i feel that all of the cursing is mandatory because being nice has gotten us fuck all for protections from these leeches.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#289

Post by kcartlidge »

whimsicalism wrote: post #6

[flagged]

> requires continuous free-riding off of the US across a wide swath of sectors including healthcare and tech

There's an element of that. However as this ruling shows (and some of us already realise) the opposite is true too. By illegally profiting off EU data and people, and siphoning all those profits away from the member states, these companies are actually free-riding off the EU population and economy.

Hopefully these revenue models really do become untenable. Maybe then they'll be replaced with more honest business models. Which, incidentally, can include opting in to ads based on personal data if that is what people knowingly choose.

Edit: re the lack of a predictable regulatory landscape in Europe:

This has been shared law for four years across the EU (which I agree is not Europe but the EU is the subject of TFA). It was also heavily trailered prior to that. Or, in simpler terms, it was predictable. And Meta knew this, which was why they tried to override the law with contractual terms.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#290

Post by int_19h »

jdiez17 wrote: post #283
somedude895 wrote: post #257

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'll preface this by saying that I don't like Meta and am very privacy-conscious. > it's also very possible that the business models are actually unpopular and people are upset after learning about them. I am 100% convinced - from people around me - that those who use FB and IG don't give a damn about privacy and would rather it be free of charge. This is clearly a small group of "elite people in the know" (which in…

Those people will be given a choice (assuming Meta doesn’t throw a tantrum and decide to leave the EU in Brexit fashion - which they are more than welcome to do!). “Do you want us to use [extensive list of all of the kinds of information we have meticulously gathered about you] to show you more relevant ads? Yes/no” I have a personal belief on what most people will answer to that question. You may disagree. But it do…

I very much doubt that people will actually get that choice, because if Facebook does give it to them, the response numbers won't look good for the model. It's easier to remove the choice altogether and then spread FUD about how it's forced on them.
Post reply on HN