[flagged]
Good product is ad by itself. If you need ads for promoting product thats is not good enough, then let it die. It is not sustainable anyway.
We need quality, not quantity. Manufacturing for profit is over.
Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
71–80 of 443 posts
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#72Earlier quoted context omitted.
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 mil…
> This, among other things of course, helped sentence millions of people to poor and deprived lives for centuries. Wealth inequality is much worse in the US than Europe, so relatively speaking, "poor" in EU is still much better than "poor" in the US.
Europe is a museum at this point. Tourism is their future. What industrial sectors are left are protected by huge government subsidies and tariffs, but as energy goes up in price and their economic dynamism continues to fall, their future is keeping the capital cities pretty for US and Chinese to visit and take pictures.
A friend of mine is a Norwegian in the US. He told me all the ambitious people in Norway scheme to come to the US to make their fortune then retire back in Norway. Seems to be a very common pattern in Europe - make your money someplace without the excessive taxes and regulations, then travel back for the social safety net. Somehow they see this as moral and just which is quite perplexing.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#73Earlier 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.
> 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. Nope, that's not correct. Edit: it is correct. Rarely I'm so happy to be wrong.
> Users must be able to withdraw consent at any time and Meta may not limit the service if users choose to do so.
Explain this sentence if my understanding is incorrect.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#74Earlier quoted context omitted.
> 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.
If you work in a European company that has a web presence and/or collects data, you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now. I don't blame Americans or others for not knowing this, but the amount of bad takes about the GDPR by Silicon Valley people in particular is so ridiculous. Every single comment section about a GDPR topic on HN has a bunch of Americans talking about how Europe is some backward…
> you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now
Again, I hear this sort of thing all the time. Then you ask lawyers and lobbyists and get a host of opinions, many of which stick depending on which DPA one approaches or complains to. As a competitive stick, it’s dangerously dynamic.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#75Meta can still use personal data for ads. They just have to explicitly ask for consent. I do not like these sensationalized titles on HN.
I would be totally fine with a regulation where they had to ask before using personal data to show ads. The overreach is that the GDPR requires that the user be able to say "no" but still use the service -- you can't make use of the service conditional on accepting ads, and you can't require users to pay instead.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#76"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.
According to gdpr they must still offer the same service regardless of the user opt-in. Remains to be seen if FB can follow the GDPR there. Also not sure whether that point of GDPR is compatible with other kinds of trade agreements. Probably they will go for "Please choose between 50 horrible autoplaying spammy ads or 4 personalized"
But wouldn't different ads be a different service?
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#77Earlier 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…
I literally work in this field and can tell you that "likes" are regulated under GDPR just like any other personal data.
If someone asks us to delete under GDPR, we have to delete these as well.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#78Meta can still use personal data for ads. They just have to explicitly ask for consent. I do not like these sensationalized titles on HN.
And no one will ever give them permission. Why would you?
Good riddance then? Time to find a new business model and maybe fire some people if your service can no longer sustain that many employees, or let a leaner competitor eat your lunch.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#79Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you work in a European company that has a web presence and/or collects data, you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now. I don't blame Americans or others for not knowing this, but the amount of bad takes about the GDPR by Silicon Valley people in particular is so ridiculous. Every single comment section about a GDPR topic on HN has a bunch of Americans talking about how Europe is some backward…
> you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now Again, I hear this sort of thing all the time. Then you ask lawyers and lobbyists and get a host of opinions, many of which stick depending on which DPA one approaches or complains to. As a competitive stick, it’s dangerously dynamic.
+1 and what the GP is stating is not how any multinational I work with considers GDPR compliance. Properly managing "likes" and other member activity are absolutely key to compliance.
Re: Meta prohibited from using personal data for advertisement
#80[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…
> 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
Is it right that a tiny but loud minority be able to ban these ad-supported services for all of society? Going by revealed preferences, most people don't consider targeting advertising to be "spying and psychological manipulation". If they did, usage patters would differ.