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

Facebook: We don’t need your consent

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#31

Post by sgift »

buboard wrote: post #28

while they may have a point their arguments are not well articulated > Europe’s strict privacy laws actually it's EU's privacy regulation > Facebook openly admitted that it has been collecting and processing data without users’ consent They said that they ve been collecting WITH consent, at least with their definition of consent > To prove that no one ordered advertising from Facebook, we conducted a neutral study by…

> In any case, i don't think facebook cares too much anymore and will just pay another yearly fine for operating in the EU.

Time to push the amounts up. 2% of worldwide annual revenue per infraction (e.g. per user) should start to add up after a while.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#32

Post by JohnFen »

rock_hard wrote: post #3

I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand about the fact that ads is what pays for Facebook to exist? It’s a key part of the offering! You get free access and get to see ads in exchange. Others have tried other business models and failed...that’s how the world works, the better offering wins! If the problem people have is ads then just make all ads illegal and we can move on. But trying to use GDPR as a lever i…

> I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand about the fact that ads is what pays for Facebook to exist?

It's not hard to understand. Everybody knows this is the case. But that excuses nothing.

Also, it's only the case because that's the business model Facebook chose. They could choose a different one.

> You get free access and get to see ads in exchange.

I love how you say that as if it's the ads that are the major issue (it's not, it's the tracking), and as if seeing ads is some sort of benefit.

> If the problem people have is ads

Again, the problem isn't the ads, it's the spying.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#33

Post by magashna »

dagav wrote: post #20
thepangolino wrote: post #5

Hasn’t there already been rulings against those kind of clauses being shoehorned in terms and conditions? I can’t make you sell your soul for subscribing to a service.

I don't think that's enforceable. You'd need some kind of soul extracting machine, or a soul-over-IP transfer mechanism. Maybe a soul mail-in option. You'd also need to implement some kind of soul storage warehouse. What would you do with all those souls anyway?

Sell them to shady executives.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#34

Post by JohnFen »

lokar wrote: post #7
thenewnewguy wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not the ads that are the problem, it's the widespread tracking + use of personal data that large ad networks like facebook perform. That's why they're using the _data protection_ legislature against facebook.

Just replace "ads" with "personalized ads" in the parent FB is free because they can pay for it with personalized ads. I doubt generic ads would fund the site as it stands today.

If that's actually true, then Facebook is an inherently immoral service that shouldn't exist.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#35

Post by buboard »

Havoc wrote: post #27

Congrats on finding a way to circumvent the letter of the law. Think they're about to have an harsh encounter with spirit of the law & European thinking about privacy & consent though.

facebook is probably laughing harder at this. A few billion in fines, combined with low irish taxation is still not big enough to justify pulling out of the EU market. The EU decided a bit too late to build a chinese-style 'firewall' around european tech and it's not really working. Instead they are playing cat and mouse with big corp, which really shows that these laws were mainly meant to have an apotropaeic effect

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#36

Post by buboard »

sgift wrote: post #31
buboard wrote: post #28

while they may have a point their arguments are not well articulated > Europe’s strict privacy laws actually it's EU's privacy regulation > Facebook openly admitted that it has been collecting and processing data without users’ consent They said that they ve been collecting WITH consent, at least with their definition of consent > To prove that no one ordered advertising from Facebook, we conducted a neutral study by…

> In any case, i don't think facebook cares too much anymore and will just pay another yearly fine for operating in the EU. Time to push the amounts up. 2% of worldwide annual revenue per infraction (e.g. per user) should start to add up after a while.

at worst, facebook will pull out of EU and close its irish HQ (but probably still be tracking users). Who won?

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#37

Post by astrodev »

buboard wrote: post #36
sgift wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In any case, i don't think facebook cares too much anymore and will just pay another yearly fine for operating in the EU. Time to push the amounts up. 2% of worldwide annual revenue per infraction (e.g. per user) should start to add up after a while.

at worst, facebook will pull out of EU and close its irish HQ (but probably still be tracking users). Who won?

The European people, actually.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#38

Post by jagged-chisel »

dagav wrote: post #20
thepangolino wrote: post #5

Hasn’t there already been rulings against those kind of clauses being shoehorned in terms and conditions? I can’t make you sell your soul for subscribing to a service.

I don't think that's enforceable. You'd need some kind of soul extracting machine, or a soul-over-IP transfer mechanism. Maybe a soul mail-in option. You'd also need to implement some kind of soul storage warehouse. What would you do with all those souls anyway?

The technical feasibility of soul extraction and storage isn't really the problem. It's the act of selling it that's the problem. I mean, we don't 'extract' and 'store' land/real estate, but we do buy and sell it. You can have a claim to land and not need to move it to your warehouse.

Just a title/deed system for souls would suffice. Since there's not a legal framework around the ownership of souls, I'm sure we could encourage its creation by starting a marketplace. Ultimately, however, I suspect 'soul' will finally be defined as "existing, being, with current human perceptions of free will" or somesuch and we will no longer have the ability to sell our souls for the licensing benefits of a product or service.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#39

Post by pwinnski »

buboard wrote: post #36
sgift wrote: post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In any case, i don't think facebook cares too much anymore and will just pay another yearly fine for operating in the EU. Time to push the amounts up. 2% of worldwide annual revenue per infraction (e.g. per user) should start to add up after a while.

at worst, facebook will pull out of EU and close its irish HQ (but probably still be tracking users). Who won?

If that happens, Europeans win.
Post reply on HN