Live data from Hacker News

EU data regulator bans personalised advertising on Facebook and Instagram

reuters.com

641–650 of 765 posts

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

#641
post #97

Earlier quoted context omitted.

A scenario from today, context: I don't have Meta/Facebook/Instagram account, my spouse has. We were discussing haircuts in the morning and I showed her some photos online. 15 minutes later she opened Facebook and saw hairdresser commercial with THOSE EXACT haircuts we were discussing. I was using iOS with no-track and adblocker on top of that. My guess is that link was made using IP address. Meta/Facebook was proces…

> We were discussing haircuts in the morning and I showed her some photos online. 15 minutes later she opened Facebook and saw hairdresser commercial with THOSE EXACT haircuts we were discussing. Genuine question but what's the harm here? Or what's the negative consequence? I understand that this is creepy, people find it uncomfortable or odd, but what about it is harmful or so negative?

There is a harm which is that information asymmetry is power asymmetry. Someone having better data on you than you have on them grants them a better bargaining position.

But it's not about material harm, it's about boundaries. And really about which boundaries can be set. For example these days we realize being married doesn't mean the other person can force you to have sex. But that wasn't obvious at a certain point in history! The boundary couldn't be realistically set because it wasn't supported by legislation. You can't set boundaries without power.

Let's consider an example. My premise here is that boundaries depending on harm done is insufficient to motivate existing legislation-supported boundaries that basically everyone would agree with.

Imagine someone that gives everyone hugs. They are gentle, mostly. They particularly like giving you hugs, because they know you don't like it. No matter what you say, they won't stop. You can't get them to leave you alone, and your work requires you to be in that office. Actually they have access to all offices of business with open positions in your field. They even show up at and in your house. They just follow you until you get tired. You can't change your locks because the company that services your house only supports that lock. You can't get them fired. Most of your coworkers don't care that much, and some like it. A few people really don't like it and have sophisticated ways to track him so they can avoid people like him most of the time, but they spent a lot of time on boats to do that and no one will hire them. You can't do that because you are neither technical enough nor willing to forego showers and employment. If you retaliate or lash out you'll be arrested. You are complaining about it, suggesting someone makes it illegal to gratuitously touch someone who doesn't want to be touched, and someone asks you "What is the harm? I know you don't like it, but how are you being harmed?"

How do you answer?

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

#642

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Hot take, it’s hard to have a free internet without ads pretty easy if you publicly fund it. My vision of Europe is every town, every city putting some money into building out federated and decentralized systems, supported by small and middle-sized business. Effectively the same way radio or public broadcasting is already supported in say Germany or the UK. We should go all the way and just rid ourselves of Meta, Te…

Anything is easy if you can take people's money and assign it to companies deemed worthy by a bureaucrat. But now you have a much bigger problem.

Got some news for you about the history of currently existing society.

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

#643
post #604
post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From the Independent (and presumably elsewhere): > Meta said it has cooperated with regulators and pointed to its announced plans to give Europeans the opportunity to consent to data collection and, later this month, to offer an ad-free subscription service in Europe that will cost 9.99 euros ($10.59) a month for access to all its products > Tobias Judin, head of the international section at the Norwegian Data Protec…

> For instance, he said, consent would have to be freely given, which wouldn't be the case if existing users had to choose between giving up their privacy rights or paying a financial penalty in the form of a subscription. This is already present in EU. Spiegel.de and others are like that. Pay or be tracked.

Pay or to be tracked is only allowed for newspapers...

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

#644

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There’s a reason why magazines ads are dying and being replaced by personalized ads. Advertising like that is widely inefficient. It’s easy to show ads. Not that easy to make money from doing so. It’s as valid alternative as telling people to use horses instead of cars to reduce CO2 emissions. They both get from point A to B, right?

> There’s a reason why magazines ads are dying and being replaced by personalized ads. Advertising like that is widely inefficient. Too bad, if your business model can’t make money without breaking laws and harming people’s rights, do you really deserve to stay in business? > It’s as valid alternative as telling people to use horses instead of cars to reduce CO2 emissions. They both get from point A to B, right? More…

When you're debating the merits of the law in question, it doesn't seem like a valid defense to say "if they can't do business under the law then that's their fault".

If I say "car dealers can't sell cars that go faster than 10mph and if they go out of business then they shouldn't exist", it's clearly fallacious, and I don't see how this is any different.

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

#645
post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They could still show ads without all the invasiveness. For example: advertisers could pay to place ads in specific Facebook groups and they would show to people visiting those pages. Like it has been done for decades in magazines and other physical media. The internet did not invent advertising.

Magazines have context though. You buy an art magazine, you'll see a Mercedes ad because it's likely that people who're interested in art make more than average. Facebook without tracking has no context whatsoever, aside from Groups and that's debatable.

[dead]

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

#646
post #236

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…

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…

I mean who cares? How does this affect your life?

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

#648

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You realize that it wasn't the ads that convinced people to consume sugary cereals, right? Ads are there to promote a brand, not a food group. Your local store or General Mills will sell you what you want, at a price that you are comfortable with. They literally don't care and have no interest in pushing any specific recipe. I bet that their low sugar alternatives are their most profitable products. Sugary products a…

Something convinced people that sugary cereals aren't just something you can use to survive in a pinch, but actually contain acceptable nutrition. People think Special K is healthy. Or Slimfast advertising 10g protein (with milk teehee) when it's actually got 2 g protein and 11 g sugar. People think this is "diet" food. Chocolate milk powder. They really buy it. How sheltered are you ? And then it causes real harm to…

> Something convinced people that sugary cereals aren't just something you can use to survive in a pinch, but actually contain acceptable nutrition

People's pockets did that. And they definitely are perfectly fine for breakfast. They're not the best, but they're not "the cause of the obesity epidemic".

> People think Special K is healthy.

What is specifically unhealthy in Special K?

> Slimfast advertising 10g protein (with milk teehee) when it's actually got 2 g protein and 11 g sugar

What does factually misleading advertising have to do with this? They're literally advertising the opposite of what we're talking about. Neither is 11g of sugar is going to cause you to gain weight.

> If you think that's the scenario being discussed when people talk about food deserts, it's coming from your imagination.

It's coming from me literally having been to a few such areas in Camden NJ, Bronx and in Baltimore. But hey! I must have imagined all of those places...

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

#649

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. As long as I don’t have to deliver (all) my private data to get those relevant ads.

Sellers and marketers don't want you opting into their market (eg. by checking a box that says "I want ads for computers"). They want to target their customers with fine-tuned, data-driven assumptions. Age, gender, income, interests, career... This is the value Facebook delivers (targeting and measuring), and it's about to go up in smoke. Nobody will pay the same price for a billboard.

Where would Facebook be getting income data from?

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

#650
post #638

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure. As long as I don’t have to deliver (all) my private data to get those relevant ads.

ALL your private data sounds rather extreme. That could certainly mean a lot of things! Some examples of what I'm fine with: if I visit a hardware store's online website and am then retargeted by their ads, or I visit a hardware magazine's website and am then targeted by hardware ads.

So you'll be happy to opt in and disable the 'do-not-track' option in your browser, etc.
Post reply on HN