Live data from Hacker News

Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

theverge.com

31–40 of 222 posts

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#31
post #30

> “Dark patterns” — confusing or deceptive user interfaces designed to steer users into making certain choices — will be prohibited. The EU says that, as a rule, cancelling subscriptions should be as easy as signing up for them. This is an excellent addition.

It’s a great idea but my understanding is that they have not yet defined the term. And that sounds very hard to define.

"I know it when I see it."

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#32
post #23
post #5

If you read the article they're asking for more than explaining algorithms. Overall they want the the tech providers to be responsible. Explaining algorithms could, in theory, give away a competitive advantage. However fairness to users seems to be a priority in this decision.

>> "Large online platforms like Facebook will have to make the working of their recommender algorithms (e.g. used for sorting content on the News Feed or suggesting TV shows on Netflix) transparent to users. Users should also be offered a recommender system “not based on profiling.”" Both of those seem like good ideas and progress. The non-profiled recommender system option especially! It's also really bothered me th…

> We'll see how willing the EU is to levy fines for breaches.

It has been very slow with GDPR, I expect it to be even slower here.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#33
post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree that it could get out of hand. We'll have to wait and see how it turns out. Since this is an EU law I wonder if it applies to content hosted on EU servers only, or any content that shows up in their users' results.

Platforms are responsible for everything shown to a user inside the EU. I suspect that Google and Facebook will not offer country specific blocklists like they do for Nazi content in Germany. If Hungary bans LGBTQIA content, it'll disappear in France. Europe can then have an argument about how they "really really not really" believe in free speech.

If they do business in the EU. Otherwise this is without teeth entirely.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#34
A good start. However let's go further, simply ban personal tracking and personalized algorithmic feeds. This would combat the echo chamber effect and social media can become a broad community experience, like TV and newspapers. It would also cripple tech advertising revenues, thus redressing the balance with traditional media.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#35
post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Platforms are responsible for everything shown to a user inside the EU. I suspect that Google and Facebook will not offer country specific blocklists like they do for Nazi content in Germany. If Hungary bans LGBTQIA content, it'll disappear in France. Europe can then have an argument about how they "really really not really" believe in free speech.

I am worried about the term "disinformation" since that can be really subjective. On the other hand anti-vax content is harmful, to me, so there's no easy answer.

[deleted]

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#37

A good start. However let's go further, simply ban personal tracking and personalized algorithmic feeds. This would combat the echo chamber effect and social media can become a broad community experience, like TV and newspapers. It would also cripple tech advertising revenues, thus redressing the balance with traditional media.

I usually have few reasons for being concerned about the future.

I think wars (even with the on-going war that Russia started), climate issues (even with the high consumption present today) and poverty (even with many countries still in it) will all have a trend of declining. However, this echo chamber fueled with miss-information is one of the things I care for.

I am so happy the EU has power and will to make good changes that gives mutual benefit to everyone when other parts of the world does not.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#38
post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s a great idea but my understanding is that they have not yet defined the term. And that sounds very hard to define.

"I know it when I see it."

in common law systems I know it when I see it is good enough, but I believe most of EU is under a Napoleonic system where you should define what you mean.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#39
> The greater the size, the greater the responsibilities of online platforms

> as a rule, cancelling subscriptions should be as easy as signing up for them

Overall I like these principles, but we'll see in a few years how they're enforced in practice. It's been 4-5 years since we've had GDPR and I still see sites that require tens of clicks to disable all advertising cookies (and the most I've seen was 300+ clicks). Even Google only this week announced they'll add "reject all" button to their cookie banners.

I expect it'll be similar in this case, companies will do bare minimum to try to stay compliant with the regulation, and it will take a few years to see real differences, but I hope it's at least a step in the right direction.

Re: Google, Meta, others will have to explain algorithms under new EU legislation

#40

A good start. However let's go further, simply ban personal tracking and personalized algorithmic feeds. This would combat the echo chamber effect and social media can become a broad community experience, like TV and newspapers. It would also cripple tech advertising revenues, thus redressing the balance with traditional media.

I’ve seen the difference between what YouTube presents to me when I’m logged in v.s. when I’m on a clean computer it can’t associate with me, and I do value the personalisation — when not logged in it shows me a hundred duds for every one thing I care about, and logged in it’s about 50:50.

How much of this improvement is a mysterious machine learning algorithm and how much is it just looking for new things from my subscription list, I’m not sure, and that’s important: being trapped in a torrent of self-reinforcing falsehoods is something I fell for in my teenage-goth-New-Age phase, which Carl Sagen condemned in The Demon-Haunted World, and which people in general have been falling for with every sychophant and propagandist from soothsayers to tabloids telling them what they want to be so.

Post reply on HN