[deleted]
Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
41–50 of 443 posts
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#42Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not illegal, they just need to ask their users if it's ok. If there's nothing wrong with this practice, why would the users say no?
If I am understanding this correctly, GDPR means that you must legally accept free riders, ie. you cannot deny service if they don't want it. Mandating companies to serve users who provide no value at all is an example of the regulatory requirements that spill down to hurting regular consumers and workers in Europe. You can see this across all sorts of fields, youth unemployment in Europe (for example) is a mess.
I don't think you're understanding it correctly, Meta is still free to serve normal contextual ads to all users so they can make money. There are many other sustainable business models they could try out if they aren't able to get their customers to pay for that sort of ad. They are not mandated to provide any kind of service to anyone.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#43"Users therefore need to be provided with a yes/no ("opt-in") consent option, otherwise Meta may not use their data for personalized advertisement."
I guess Facebook's solution could be a pop-up asking whether you want to continue using it as before or if you want to deny access to your personal data and pay $50 a month.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#44[flagged]
> 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…
If the standard becomes "make illegal business models that the media gets enough people upset about" (without even a vote where the alternatives [paying for service] are clearly explained), then -yeah- people are going to be left poorer.
Europe already endured centuries of this when the majority Christian ethos was that usury & banking were an evil to be banned. This, among other things of course, helped sentence millions of people to poor and deprived lives for centuries.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#45[flagged]
I'd rather live in a society where people are treated like human beings than one where people are treated like consumers.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#46Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spyware? This is about logging activity of users on the same app that you built, not tracking them across the internet. Writing down what someone does while interacting with your own business was never "criminalized" to begin with. Businesses do pay for this product. Unilaterally making tech products illegal after backlash in the media is precisely why capital is deallocated from Europe to other places with less reac…
> not tracking them across the internet FB's like button, found on many websites, tracks you across the internet whether or not you click it. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/facebook-to-pay-90-...
Right, and maybe that should not be permissible but this decision is about on-site personalization based on stuff like the interests you enter into Facebook yourself.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#47Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not illegal, they just need to ask their users if it's ok. If there's nothing wrong with this practice, why would the users say no?
If I am understanding this correctly, GDPR means that you must legally accept free riders, ie. you cannot deny service if they don't want it. Mandating companies to serve users who provide no value at all is an example of the regulatory requirements that spill down to hurting regular consumers and workers in Europe. You can see this across all sorts of fields, youth unemployment in Europe (for example) is a mess.
> If I am understanding this correctly, GDPR means that you must legally accept free riders, ie. you cannot deny service if they don't want it.
Facebook is absolutely free to charge everyone.
But yes certain business models (like Facebook’s apparently) are not legal under the GDPR. That’s the point.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#48Earlier quoted context omitted.
If I am understanding this correctly, GDPR means that you must legally accept free riders, ie. you cannot deny service if they don't want it. Mandating companies to serve users who provide no value at all is an example of the regulatory requirements that spill down to hurting regular consumers and workers in Europe. You can see this across all sorts of fields, youth unemployment in Europe (for example) is a mess.
I don't think you're understanding it correctly, Meta is still free to serve normal contextual ads to all users so they can make money. There are many other sustainable business models they could try out if they aren't able to get their customers to pay for that sort of ad. They are not mandated to provide any kind of service to anyone.
[deleted]
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#49Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spy on people? If you like a post on Instagram it is core to their service that they log that information. If they didn't, the app wouldn't work very well.
Why do you participate in discussion about the GDPR when you clearly know nothing about it? Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR. The illegal part is about processing or forwarding personal data of users to third parties, when users haven't agreed to that aspect of the "service". You usually see the distinction between "functional" and "advertising" cookies in t…
> Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR
I’ve heard many “of course X or Y” pertaining to GDPR that turned out wrong. Because it’s a law interpreted by twenty-seven separate DPAs.
GDPR’s aims are good. But there is legitimate criticism in its design.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#50Earlier quoted context omitted.
Spyware? This is about logging activity of users on the same app that you built, not tracking them across the internet. Writing down what someone does while interacting with your own business was never "criminalized" to begin with. Businesses do pay for this product. Unilaterally making tech products illegal after backlash in the media is precisely why capital is deallocated from Europe to other places with less reac…
> not tracking them across the internet FB's like button, found on many websites, tracks you across the internet whether or not you click it. https://news.bloomberglaw.com/litigation/facebook-to-pay-90-...
That's not what this case was about, though. It's about whether FB is allowed to log your behavior on their properties and use that to choose which ads to show you.