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

Facebook: We don’t need your consent

noyb.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 135 posts

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#61

Post by PeterStuer »

sigwinch28 wrote: post #10
rock_hard wrote: post #3

I don’t understand what’s so hard to understand about the fact that ads is what pays for Facebook to exist? It’s a key part of the offering! You get free access and get to see ads in exchange. Others have tried other business models and failed...that’s how the world works, the better offering wins! If the problem people have is ads then just make all ads illegal and we can move on. But trying to use GDPR as a lever i…

The issue is not advertising, but "to aggregate user interests and track people on the internet". While advertising is not illegal under the GDPR, collecting an individual's data for marketing or advertising purposes without a "basis" (as defined in the GDPR) is. The plaintiff is arguing about data privacy, whereas Facebook's lawyer is playing the advertising card as a counter. The plaintiff is unhappy about the way…

The lobbies have been trying to reverse the controller/processor relation from the very start. They have been told time and time again this was not an acceptable interpretation of the GDPR. It's time one of them is made an example in court, with fines stiff enough to discourage any corp from trying this strategy again.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#62

Post by [deleted] »

thierryzoller wrote: post #58
buboard wrote: post #28

while they may have a point their arguments are not well articulated > Europe’s strict privacy laws actually it's EU's privacy regulation > Facebook openly admitted that it has been collecting and processing data without users’ consent They said that they ve been collecting WITH consent, at least with their definition of consent > To prove that no one ordered advertising from Facebook, we conducted a neutral study by…

Your are funny, you say their arguments are not well articulated, yet you do seem not to be up to point. You argue they are regulations? European Regulations are law. European Directives and Regulation are the two main legislative They argue users are using facebook because they want advertising, their primary usage is advertising and for that advertisement they consent to share their data. That's so ridiculous it is…

[deleted]

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#63

Post by voxic11 »

bad_user wrote: post #55
oarabbus_ wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Could you elaborate?

I'm not the parent, but from my pov FB is a net negative for society, so if they are unwilling to play by our laws, then I'd rather see them get the fuck out. They won't of course, because it leaves the market open for grabs.

If they leave the EU though they don't need to follow European laws or pay European taxes, but that doesn't prevent European users from continuing to use the actual website.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#64

Post by buboard »

thierryzoller wrote: post #58
buboard wrote: post #28

while they may have a point their arguments are not well articulated > Europe’s strict privacy laws actually it's EU's privacy regulation > Facebook openly admitted that it has been collecting and processing data without users’ consent They said that they ve been collecting WITH consent, at least with their definition of consent > To prove that no one ordered advertising from Facebook, we conducted a neutral study by…

Your are funny, you say their arguments are not well articulated, yet you do seem not to be up to point. You argue they are regulations? European Regulations are law. European Directives and Regulation are the two main legislative They argue users are using facebook because they want advertising, their primary usage is advertising and for that advertisement they consent to share their data. That's so ridiculous it is…

don't be insulting

> European Regulations are law.

Regulations have to be implemented and integrated into each country's laws. Countries may not have yet implemented GDPR

> their primary usage is advertising

I don't see where FB claimed that advertising is primary usage and others are secondary. i can infer from the text that they parceled as part of the "service promise"

> FB does not give all the data, the definition of what data

Facebook says they are GDPR compliant and i doubt they 'd say that without the consultation of at least one EU data authority (perhaps the irish?). https://www.facebook.com/business/gdpr

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#65

Post by strbean »

cmcd wrote: post #21
xg15 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, ads should be made illegal, but that's not the point here. Facebook is perfectly free to show ads to people, they are just not free to track people. They are trying to use ads as a justification for tracking here, which is the contested point. And before you answer that ads without tracking don't pay the bills, that's honestly Facebook's problem.

The alternative to ads is subscription services, which already exist. If people prefered subscription social media to ad based they would flock to those, but they don't.

Por que no los dos? Sign up for Hulu today! Pay a subscription fee and still get the benefit of tons of ads! Or pay more for our Hulu (No Ads) offering, which still has ads on certain programs.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#66

Post by Hamuko »

buboard wrote: post #35
Havoc wrote: post #27

Congrats on finding a way to circumvent the letter of the law. Think they're about to have an harsh encounter with spirit of the law & European thinking about privacy & consent though.

facebook is probably laughing harder at this. A few billion in fines, combined with low irish taxation is still not big enough to justify pulling out of the EU market. The EU decided a bit too late to build a chinese-style 'firewall' around european tech and it's not really working. Instead they are playing cat and mouse with big corp, which really shows that these laws were mainly meant to have an apotropaeic effect

Ah yes, requiring user consent is exactly the same thing as censoring information not beneficial to the government.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#67

Post by riversflow »

cmcd wrote: post #21
xg15 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IMO, ads should be made illegal, but that's not the point here. Facebook is perfectly free to show ads to people, they are just not free to track people. They are trying to use ads as a justification for tracking here, which is the contested point. And before you answer that ads without tracking don't pay the bills, that's honestly Facebook's problem.

The alternative to ads is subscription services, which already exist. If people prefered subscription social media to ad based they would flock to those, but they don't.

“The alternative to indentured servitude is free labor, which already exists. If people preferred free labor to indentured service, no one would sign a service contract, but they do.”

-paraphrasing someone 300 years ago, probably.

Sometimes people pick things that are bad; that people choose something doesn’t make it somehow good.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#68

Post by buboard »

Hamuko wrote: post #66
buboard wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

facebook is probably laughing harder at this. A few billion in fines, combined with low irish taxation is still not big enough to justify pulling out of the EU market. The EU decided a bit too late to build a chinese-style 'firewall' around european tech and it's not really working. Instead they are playing cat and mouse with big corp, which really shows that these laws were mainly meant to have an apotropaeic effect

Ah yes, requiring user consent is exactly the same thing as censoring information not beneficial to the government.

i don't really mean a censorship firewall, rather an attempt to shoo US companies from the EU market the same way that China is protecting its own companies.

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#69

Post by Hamuko »

buboard wrote: post #64
thierryzoller wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your are funny, you say their arguments are not well articulated, yet you do seem not to be up to point. You argue they are regulations? European Regulations are law. European Directives and Regulation are the two main legislative They argue users are using facebook because they want advertising, their primary usage is advertising and for that advertisement they consent to share their data. That's so ridiculous it is…

don't be insulting > European Regulations are law. Regulations have to be implemented and integrated into each country's laws. Countries may not have yet implemented GDPR > their primary usage is advertising I don't see where FB claimed that advertising is primary usage and others are secondary. i can infer from the text that they parceled as part of the "service promise" > FB does not give all the data, the definiti…

>Regulations have to be implemented and integrated into each country's laws. Countries may not have yet implemented GDPR

This is 100% wrong.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-making-process/types-eu-la...

Re: Facebook: We don’t need your consent

#70

Post by buboard »

chmod775 wrote: post #49
buboard wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

at worst, facebook will pull out of EU and close its irish HQ (but probably still be tracking users). Who won?

> Who won? Whichever European social network replaces them. Facebook is a freak social network considering how long it has survived. People used to migrate every one to two years.

> Whichever European social network replaces them.

GDPR makes it very difficult to touch user's private data for commercial purposes. that's the whole business of a SN so this is kind of precluded

Post reply on HN