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

Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

ftc.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 135 posts

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#31

Post by protomyth »

gyardley wrote: post #3

I never understood why bodies like the FTC rely on 'independent, third-party audits' for enforcement, since they end up making the entire action pointless. The independent third-party auditor will give Facebook a stamp of approval, both in the next 180 days and every two years thereafter, because the independent third-party auditor wants the repeat business. Same thing goes for any regulation that depends on a third…

Quite a lot of work goes under contract from the government and auditors or "program evaluators" are pretty common. A lot of grant programs on the social service and education side have a employee as a grant officer but are pretty much run by outside contractors.

Not saying it is good or bad (kind of depends on who the contracting company is), but it is very common and pretty much standard business for the government.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#32

Post by JonnieCache »

mgummelt wrote: post #24
jellicle wrote: post #15

So the penalty for ongoing repeated lies and fraud is.... nothing. Zero. The FTC has investigated, and the settlement is zero money and zero penalties. Not one dollar. Whew! I'm glad they were punished! They won't do THAT again! The U.S. is really in late-stage empire breakdown. I don't think there is any significant enforcement of any laws whatsoever against companies and people that are reasonably well connected. T…

Care to fill in the logical leap from your second to third lines?

I think that third line was probably more of an "impotent howl into the void in futile pursuit of catharsis" kind of comment than an "attempting to advance the cause of mutual human understanding" kind of comment.

In this day and age I think we can let it slide.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#33

Post by felipemnoa »

Silhouette wrote: post #30
jnorthrop wrote: post #6

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This sentence: "including giving consumers clear and prominent notice and obtaining consumers' express consent before their information is shared beyond the privacy settings they have established" was the killer to me. It forces FB to much more transparent about what it does with data and could have a significant shift in its revenue model.

The trouble is, it only "forces" Facebook to do anything if there will be meaningful sanctions if they don't. They've just been found, in a formal investigation, to have broken numerous fundamental privacy laws across several continents, and been punished with... absolutely nothing, as far as I can tell. All this has done is teach them that they are above the law and should feel free to continue doing whatever they l…

This seems to be a first warning. It seems like next time they will not just get a warning, but who knows.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#34

Post by marquis »

freehunter wrote: post #7
nextparadigms wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember very well when the first one happened. It pissed me off because someone got to see some information I thought was private after I went to the trouble of going through Facebook's previous 50 privacy settings.

My family had a major falling out with my father, to the point where myself and my sister had a restraining order against him when I was 7 and she was 9. I haven't seen him or talked to him in 16 years. After Facebook deleted my privacy settings, I had a message from him sitting in my inbox the next day. My sister called me, crying, because she had gotten the same message. Both of our accounts were previously unsearc…

I would donate to your ACLU legal action against FB. I am consistently editing myself on FB, even in private groups, because of a sinking suspicion that with a flick-of-a-switch it can all be public.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#35

Post by dreamdu5t »

jellicle wrote: post #15

So the penalty for ongoing repeated lies and fraud is.... nothing. Zero. The FTC has investigated, and the settlement is zero money and zero penalties. Not one dollar. Whew! I'm glad they were punished! They won't do THAT again! The U.S. is really in late-stage empire breakdown. I don't think there is any significant enforcement of any laws whatsoever against companies and people that are reasonably well connected. T…

Privacy policies are not binding agreements or contracts. Facebook didn't lie. They simply don't have to follow their privacy policy exactly, since it's not a binding agreement.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#36

Post by d_r »

brown9-2 wrote: post #2

Wow, this list is brutal: -In December 2009, Facebook changed its website so certain information that users may have designated as private – such as their Friends List – was made public. They didn't warn users that this change was coming, or get their approval in advance. - Facebook represented that third-party apps that users' installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact,…

"- Facebook represented that third-party apps that users' installed would have access only to user information that they needed to operate. In fact, the apps could access nearly all of users' personal data – data the apps didn't need."

Privacy/ethics issues aside, from a pure developer standpoint, isn't this just a feature? Where do we draw the line between functionality and privacy?

User A allows user B to see her data via "Friends only." User B runs app X, whose functionality includes interacting with friends. Let's say it shows on a map where each of your friends lives. App X can see the said data for the purposes of providing functionality.

Yes, I know that by strict definition this conflicts with "friends only." You now have "friends and the application executable code only." But how is this different from, say, Gmail auto-scanning my e-mail to show ads? Is it because I trust Google and don't trust $random_fb_app_developer?

Likely one concern is that this third-party developer can disrespect (or actually, not even know about) that "friends only" setting and inadvertently make the data visible to other parties.

(Disclaimer: Don't get me wrong, I loathe/distrust most FB apps as much as the next person. Just trying to think from an honest developer's shoes here.)

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#37

Post by freehunter »

bad_user wrote: post #26
freehunter wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My family had a major falling out with my father, to the point where myself and my sister had a restraining order against him when I was 7 and she was 9. I haven't seen him or talked to him in 16 years. After Facebook deleted my privacy settings, I had a message from him sitting in my inbox the next day. My sister called me, crying, because she had gotten the same message. Both of our accounts were previously unsearc…

Shit, that sucks -- people are not yet aware of the damage the lack of online privacy can bring. And I fear that because of inertia, when the damages will become visible, then it will be too late.

I kind of wish the similar Google Buzz incident had gotten more press than it did. A boy who wasn't even in a balloon was on the news for days, but the case of a woman who was being harassed on Buzz by her abusive ex was lost in the public mind after a few minutes. Both the Buzz and Facebook cases were decided by the FTC very recently (the Buzz case was settled in October of this year). Perhaps we've reached a turning point in online privacy?

But then, looking at things like Protect-IP and SOPA, perhaps the regulatory answer is to just do away with privacy altogether.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#38

Post by daenz »

jellicle wrote: post #15

So the penalty for ongoing repeated lies and fraud is.... nothing. Zero. The FTC has investigated, and the settlement is zero money and zero penalties. Not one dollar. Whew! I'm glad they were punished! They won't do THAT again! The U.S. is really in late-stage empire breakdown. I don't think there is any significant enforcement of any laws whatsoever against companies and people that are reasonably well connected. T…

> The only thing keeping the society from total breakdown is inertia.

I know, society is breaking down, kids are getting more disrespectful, things are more expensive, the end of the world is upon us, etc :) You taking your lifetime to come to a realization about the state of the world does not make the realization less true before you had it. It's a memory glitch. Jump back 100 years, it's the same shit.

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#39

Post by lemming »

johnnyg wrote: post #18

Many have posted to this thread with complaints that boil down to "this is a slap on the wrist because they are well connected". If you were the FTC, what would you do to Facebook in this case, how would it be supported in law and what long term change for the better would your action create? Privacy is a civil good but it is a fine line to walk indeed to punish an innovator during a recession. Where's the happy medi…

...to punish an innovator during a recession.

This is not even close to a fine line. The fact that Facebook may be an innovator or the fact that we may be in a recession have nothing to do with their legal responsibilities to their users. If they have violated those responsibilities they should be punished appropriately regardless of the current economic situation, and them being an "innovator" is totally irrelevant. Should we allow innovative companies to dump toxic waste or employ racist hiring policies, for example?

Re: Facebook settles with FTC, under privacy watch for 20 years

#40

Post by JonnieCache »

chalst wrote: post #9
JonnieCache wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Don't the credit rating agencies work the same way? The companies being rated pay the agencies, not the companies that want to know the rating.

They do. Their value is unclear. Accountants supposedly are employed by shareholders, but in practice are employed by executives. This makes auditing problematic, but it does have some value. The bigger problem there is the big four's oligopoly: they are too big to fail.

Thought so.

Why do people insist on inventing wacky conspiracy theories when the scam is right there in front of them?

Post reply on HN