EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram • Hacker News Board

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#461

Post by r00fus » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:38 PM UTC

PaulHoule wrote: post #388

lapphi wrote: post #236

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Upon logging into okcupid today I received a pop up inviting me to join The League (another dating app), with my phone number already pre-propagated. After accepting, they sent me this email. > We use the combination of your Facebook and LinkedIn data plus your About Me and Photos to ensure we are building a balanced, high-achieving and diverse community. Our screening algorithm looks at indicators like social influe…

One of those things y'all never upvote is papers about psychodiagnostic software that uses your social media posts, cell phone location data, etc. to diagnose both chronic and acute psychiatric conditions. I'm fairly certain that if a person is highly active on social media such a system could produce a better diagnosis than most people get when they see a professional, if only because the quality of psychodiagnosis…

Well, if you've ever watched a movie like Real Genius [1], you may begin to understand some of the concerns of people building things with advanced capabilities.

Imagine how your tech could be used for evil and how profitable that would be. It could be a 2nd or even 3rd order effect, even.

[1] Film focuses on a college team building something they think is cool but really is a key part of a weapons system.

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#462

Post by waveBidder » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:38 PM UTC

d3w4s9 wrote: post #424

mjburgess wrote: post #90

Comments here so far focus on personalised ads as the issue -- but that's a symptom of what's being banned, which is the mass collection of personal data. Personalised ads are beside the point. The issue is how they are personalised, namely by building a rich profile of user behaviour based on non-consensual tracking. It isnt even clear that there's a meaningful sense of 'consent' to what modern ad companies (ie., go…

"non-consensual tracking" Pretty sure it is written in the ToS. Maybe don't agree with that legal agreement and continue to sign up for the service in the first place?

They build a shadow profile regardless of whether you sign up, so this is just victim blaming

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#463

Post by froh » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:38 PM UTC

RestlessMind wrote: post #440

pembrook wrote: post #75

Ok, my contrarian hot take (for HN at least). The real entities we need to be afraid of in regards to privacy are governments & politicians, not companies & entrepreneurs. The worst thing a company can do is try to sell you more soap. The government on the other hand can literally ruin your life (or even end it in some countries). The EU is doing a fantastic job of keeping everyone distracted by pointing the finger a…

Here is the worst thing you are doing - creating a false dichotomy. We should be weary of both the companies and the governments when it comes to privacy.

yes! the problem is microtargeting for politics, no matter who sponsors it.

I couldn't care less about toothpaste. I care about disinformation and divisiveness campaigns on topics like LGBT+, POC, workplace protection, environment, healthcare, food safety, unionization, gun safety, etc etc etc.

those are not about a little more revenue, those are about how we live, as a society. and _that_ should be a taboo for microtargeting. our ancestors fought long and hard to end feudal aristocracy. and no less is at stake than our freedom.

phew sorry for the rant.

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#464

Post by drdaeman » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:41 PM UTC

mjburgess wrote: post #90

Comments here so far focus on personalised ads as the issue -- but that's a symptom of what's being banned, which is the mass collection of personal data. Personalised ads are beside the point. The issue is how they are personalised, namely by building a rich profile of user behaviour based on non-consensual tracking. It isnt even clear that there's a meaningful sense of 'consent' to what modern ad companies (ie., go…

> mass collection of personal data

True, but even if EU bans just the personalized ads, chances are that this personal data hoarding bubble is going to finally burst and die, because the belief in "big data = big money" was powered almost solely by the ad industry. I believe ads (and outright abuse, but that's not exactly a business model) were the only use case/reason for why this data is collected and why it's considered valuable.

We'll see attempts to rapidly change the tune (possibly something about "AI", given it's the buzzword of the day) from the companies whose valuation is strongly tied to this myth/meme, as they'll desperately try to keep their $$$-faces. But, I believe, chances are, if using personal data for showing ads will be illegal in a major market like EU, many companies will stop collecting because the data will become worthless, a liability rather than an asset.

And then I have this silly dream that one day a transhuman age will come closer and I will have machinery to aid myself, personally, that would collect and store my interactions with the world, strictly locally, strictly for my own personal use - an extension of my own mental or physical capabilities (I need glasses to see, I suspect I'll need a hearing aid someday, and I have some concerns about my memory and attention spans - so, you know, From the Moment I Understood the Weakness of My Flesh.meme.txt). So every time I hear things like "we're outlawing facial recognition/conversation recording/data collection" without a "(*) for businesses" I'm kind of disappointed. Of course, my hope is that those laws will be reviewed accordingly as we'll get closer.

Thus, I believe, a ban on targeted ads alone could be a possibly better outcome than a blanket ban on data collection. But, uh, whatever works, I guess...

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#465

Post by aaroninsf » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:42 PM UTC

teachrdan wrote: post #394

PaulHoule wrote: post #388

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One of those things y'all never upvote is papers about psychodiagnostic software that uses your social media posts, cell phone location data, etc. to diagnose both chronic and acute psychiatric conditions. I'm fairly certain that if a person is highly active on social media such a system could produce a better diagnosis than most people get when they see a professional, if only because the quality of psychodiagnosis…

I don't mean to sound flip, but I don't think identifying pathological psychological conditions via web browsing habits is all that difficult. I have a friend who went through a severe depressive episode. As soon as he started watching YouTube at 2am, he started getting ads for depression meds.

Worse yet, "web browsing habits" is just one neck of the hydra. What you buy (when, as mentioned) serves as strong signal for any number of factors; all your conventional demographics of course...

I'm not in the industry but I am very curious to know if we're already in the conditional-execution phase of surveillance/ad-serving/profile-updating: is there an idea [yet] of serving a challenge, and then both recording how/if it is engaged, with automated graph traversal to "look closer"... all offered stochastically...

The simple way to put that in part is, are we now getting A/B tests run on us explicitly, rather than merely implicitly?

(Personally, I'm 100% off Meta products and TikTok—but am leaking through LinkedIn and, regrettably, Google...)

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#466

Post by waveBidder » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:43 PM UTC

4RealFreedom wrote: post #298

AndersSandvik wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can still opt for taking money out of an ATM and and pay by cash to not be tracked by the card company. Meta does not offer the same option

You have to use Meta? I'm not arguing for or against privacy here - just trying to point out that you still have options. It might be a pain to contact loved ones, check in on friends, etc. but so is using an ATM.

shadow profiling doesn't care if you directly use Meta products. You're information about your friends, and another example of trends.

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#467

Post by dspillett » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:44 PM UTC

mjburgess wrote: post #90

Comments here so far focus on personalised ads as the issue -- but that's a symptom of what's being banned, which is the mass collection of personal data. Personalised ads are beside the point. The issue is how they are personalised, namely by building a rich profile of user behaviour based on non-consensual tracking. It isnt even clear that there's a meaningful sense of 'consent' to what modern ad companies (ie., go…

> Comments here so far focus on personalised ads as the issue -- but that's a symptom of what's being banned, which is the mass collection of personal data.

Exactly. There are places where the data is being collected without direct adverts or other visible signs being present (certain web analytics services for instance). This activity tracking gets married up to the other personal information the various companies hold about you.

> Personalised ads are beside the point.

I think they are an important part of the point, just not the whole point.

Being able to sell adverts for a bit more usually is what makes it worth a company's hassle implementing and maintaining their stalking infrastructure. Without that the online commercial stalkiness would die down an awful lot.

On the face of it some might think that this ruling achieves this, but it would not have that effect unless:

* other significant territories imposed the same sort of restrictions

* those restrictions were routines enforced

* and the enforcement (when transgressions are found) was sufficiently inconvenient to the companies

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#468

Post by hn72774 » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

digging wrote: post #382

officeplant wrote: post #306

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As someone that refuses to use Linked In or Facebook it is wild to me that someone would not only use them, but willingly link a dating app to them. It makes me wonder how many more things I'll never get to participate in because I've deleted/avoid social media.

You and I, and probably a few others here on HN, are slowly being sifted into a parallel "unsocial" world, I fear. It's genuinely disgusting to see the kind of personal data we're expected to pass out by the truckload for every little digital trinket and feature, let alone entire facets of society such as dating apps.

I'm now feeling like social only exists in real life, not online. We were sold an illusion of connectedness when we were in fact the product being sold. Good marketing. We were told what we wanted to hear.

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#469

Post by JAlexoid » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:45 PM UTC

FinnKuhn wrote: post #336

pembrook wrote: post #75

Ok, my contrarian hot take (for HN at least). The real entities we need to be afraid of in regards to privacy are governments & politicians, not companies & entrepreneurs. The worst thing a company can do is try to sell you more soap. The government on the other hand can literally ruin your life (or even end it in some countries). The EU is doing a fantastic job of keeping everyone distracted by pointing the finger a…

I just want to note that even if you are only afraid of the government in regards to privacy and not companies guess who those companies sell your data and privacy to. As an example the US government already buys location data from companies [1]. Protecting your privacy from the government (while also important) isn't enough due to companies sharing their data with the government, sometimes even for free and without…

> Therefore you can't protect your privacy from the government without also protecting it from companies.

This is reasonable.

Though knowing that the data used to serve ads has very little overlap with the information that governments are interested in, makes this move more pointlessly destructive.

Funny enough, the data that governments are interested in isn't getting restricted. There are laws about how to protect that store that data, but that data is not being restricted.

Let's not pretend that governments are going to tell companies to stop collecting data, that they are inherently interested in procuring.

Re: EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

#470

Post by mcv » Thu, Nov 02, 2023, 4:46 PM UTC

RestlessMind wrote: post #447

mcv wrote: post #400

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think they're all worthless.

You are wrong. Personalized ads are worth far more to advertisers and publishers. Also to the end users based on their actual behavior. Source - worked on ads for a few years at FAANG.

Yeah, but they're worthless to me. I don't think I've ever clicked one of those personalised ads. Their personalisation sucks, they generally show stuff that's not remotely relevant to me, and I've long ago learned not to click any ads.