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

411–420 of 443 posts

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#411

Post by merdaverse »

whimsicalism wrote: post #18
Nextgrid wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just because we somehow ended up in a situation where spyware got effectively decriminalised doesn't mean it's a good situation especially in the long-term. If nobody is willing to pay for your product, maybe it shouldn't exist?

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…

Where is this fantasy world where the US has more appropriate medical care than the EU?

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#412

Post by HDThoreaun »

nine_k wrote: post #339
no_time wrote: post #230

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I unironically enjoy non-targeted ads. Every time I see one that has nothing to do with my interests, I know that my meticulously tuned home network and browser settings are working.

What kind of upside do you see in this lack of targeting? (Asking unironically, too; different people value different aspects.)

Targeting is manipulative and I don’t like being manipulated. Really all advertising is, but targeting more so.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#413

Post by dmitriid »

rybosworld wrote: post #377
Nextgrid wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> If Europe wants more ethical tech, they should make an honest effort to create an environment that supports that. I.e., invest in their own tech industry. Which is difficult if tech has been monopolised by US companies that break the laws, so they're addressing that for a start, as to level the playing field (both with GDPR and other regulations such as the Digital Markets Act).

By breaking laws implemented after the fact?

All laws are implemented after the fact.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#414

Post by dmitriid »

aeternum wrote: post #397
LelouBil wrote: post #220

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm happy to be an EU citizen for all the great tech regulations that are actually passing here !

[flagged]

Nothing in the regulation requires the dark pattern popups that the tech puts up. Literally nothing.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#415

Post by xfz »

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?

I see a lot of debate about market forces vs regulation. In my view, neither one of them will solve every problem; that's why we have both.

As others have mentioned, an issue with Facebook is that the consent was not informed and explicit.

Another group of related issues, and this is where I think the balance needs to tip to regulation, is the network effect/walled garden/near monopoly: choosing another platform doesn't just require signing up to another business model or UX, it also involves being able to communicate with a different group of people. This is compounded by their takeover of Instagram and WhatsApp.

As Facebook only offers one model (pay for the service by sacrificing personal data) it's an all or none proposition. This might satisfy the US market better than European ones.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#416

Post by whimsicalism »

merdaverse wrote: post #411
whimsicalism wrote: post #18

Earlier 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…

Where is this fantasy world where the US has more appropriate medical care than the EU?

The US develops more therapies, drugs, and treatments than the entire EU despite having a fraction of the population.

Europe benefits from the US doing that for them and then paying low prices that don't cover the costs of drug R&D.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#417

Post by aeternum »

dmitriid wrote: post #414
aeternum wrote: post #397

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

Nothing in the regulation requires the dark pattern popups that the tech puts up. Literally nothing.

Failure to consider the second-order effects of regulation causes the greatest harm to society.

Because of GDPR, consent to cookies must be freely given, specific, informed, and based on an explicit affirmative action. On a webpage, it's pretty clear that action must be a click. The regulation does require it if you want to use cookies, and it's near impossible to code any useful page without storing state (cookies). What percent of websites use zero cookies?

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#418

Post by LelouBil »

aeternum wrote: post #417
dmitriid wrote: post #414

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing in the regulation requires the dark pattern popups that the tech puts up. Literally nothing.

Failure to consider the second-order effects of regulation causes the greatest harm to society. Because of GDPR, consent to cookies must be freely given, specific, informed, and based on an explicit affirmative action . On a webpage, it's pretty clear that action must be a click. The regulation does require it if you want to use cookies, and it's near impossible to code any useful page without storing state (cookies)…

It's consent to unnecesary coookies that is needed.

You can have a session cookie without popup, but an analytics cookie or a personalized ads cookie requires consent.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#419

Post by Cupertino95014 »

Dumbdo wrote: post #278
Cupertino95014 wrote: post #114

World party planning: China: I'll bring the hardware! US: I'll bring the software! EU: I'll bring the lawyers!

This reads like it's straight from the comment section of a Facebook post and is low quality even for HN's recent discussion culture.

.. and yet, internet memes get currency because they express something people feel and hadn't seen articulated, or at least so succinctly.

So why don't you address the underlying issue instead of denigrating the meme? If you have something to say about it, that is.

Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement

#420

Post by sershe »

pornel wrote: post #320
sershe wrote: post #296

"The decision would still allow Meta to use non-personal data (such as the content of a story) to personalize ads or to ask users for consent to ads via a 'yes/no' option. Users must be able to withdraw consent at any time and Meta may not limit the service if users choose to do so." How is that supposed to work? FB is required to provide a service at a loss? If I were FB I'd work to actually make a yes/no contract -…

FB isn't required to operate in the EU, but if they want to, they're required to follow EU law. It's FB's problem to find a way to be profitable while following the law. It's normal that companies have to find a way to live with the cost of regulations, and if they can't, leave the market or go bust. For example, manufacturers are required to avoid use of harmful substances, and follow health and safety regulations,…

I was not asking about the letter of the law, that's obvious from TFA. I was asking about how it is fair in any way. It's kinda like a user comes into my store and I say "I can give you a haircut bundled with you giving me $30, yes/no", the user says "no, I'll only pay you $10", and EU says I am still required to give them the same haircut with the same quality.

Ofc if I/FB choose to shut down or alter my service for everyone under these conditions, the other angle is that EU govt has decided that it knows better than mere proles who want to explicitly consent to the exchange. It's less like manufacturers avoiding harmful substances, and more like e.g. govt of China requiring Apple to alter Maps to display "correct" information under threat of a ban.

Post reply on HN