EU to Facebook, 'Drop Dead' | Hacker News Reader

EU to Facebook, 'Drop Dead'

pluralistic.net

66 pointssamizdis32 comments

I wish there was one button way to opt out of behaviorally addicting features. Maybe next big regulation comming from EU.

I think it’s labeled “uninstall”.

At some point people have to take responsibility for their own actions and realize government regulators aren’t their sugar daddies in charge of making sure they don’t do anything self destructive. If that’s what sugar daddies do, no clue?

Unfortunately, I personally dont think the average person is that capable of self regulation at this point. Social media culture has become a cornerstone for genz and late millenials, and is designed to make these dark patterns work on you better.

Meaning in future this issue might actuslly compound. And i dont think any of this is malicious intentionally. I think its just self serving assholes exploiting whatever gets them what they want.

The argument is akin to the bans on toxic chemicals in domestic products. It worked for lead, mercury, asbestos and a host of other things. These have saved many, many lives.

Similar rules around predatory lending, predatory insurance, mandatory all-in air flight pricing have all done wonders for consumers’ sanity and improved market offerings enormously.

How can we talk about uninstalling when Facebook has shadow profils based on your friends and monitor your traffic outside of Facebook without you agreeing to it via the share buttons? And don’t tell me you can use a complex technical solution to avoid it. The EU is legislating for the average user, not people who can block JS.

Uninstall anyway. Shadow profile or not, uninstall.

there's a difference between "taking responsibility for your own actions" and "designing a platform that is expressly designed to be addicting enough to subvert that responsibility"

chief example: infinite scroll.

why does content need to scroll infinitely other than to keep eyeballs on the site and make it easy to lose track of time?

Why not? I’ll take that over them writing laws that only benefit the wealthy and big corps any day of the week.

Great line:

“The company keeps delivering bad news to investors, who are not mollified by Mark Zuckerberg's promise to rescue the company by convincing all of humanity to spend the rest of their lives as highly surveilled, legless, sexless, low-polygon cartoon characters.”

I’m quite impressed that Facebook has lasted this long with its business model. A combination of being based out of the US, where legislators look the other way if jobs are being created and taxes paid, and the snail-like movement of European law makers and enforcers, allowed companies like Facebook to become highly profitable spy machines.

It was never going to last, but it lasted far longer than I thought it would. Just look at TikTok as an example. A literal spy app by communist China that experts have been warning about for years, and it’s still functioning with little resistance. Amazing.

man. while this is a very good decision by the EU, my gut tells me that this is going to further obliterate the tech industry.

The current tech industry really needs a big change, I'm dead tired of all these companies putting profitability as "some VC's problem down the line". We keep seeing companies offering products at a loss, then dying and leaving their users in the mud as they scramble to raise prices above reason.

Why do I, as a customer, need to worry if the company providing me a service is making enough money?

The average person doesn't care about this ofc, or how they're being emotionally manipulated to reach some engagement metric.

Well, obliterate which part of the tech industry? The EU based or the overseas? And which other industries were obliterated by the tech industry?

The fb and ad-tech argument will be that "non-customized" ads are bad because of the low match with user interests.

So one ad will cost you a lot more displays for getting a click/worth view.

But this is maybe not a bad thing in itself. When you see the benefits that google, Facebook and co can extract from ads, you can see that the 'pay per views'/'pay per click' rate is probably way too expensive compared to the marginal costs of running the business.

So, contrary to people saying that this will kill all the business financing with ads, I think that it could be a good reset to still be effective but just with less margin for big ad techs.

Someone in the know should enlighten us whether these measures have any benefit after years and years of practice? Meaning the mentioned companies already got what they were after. I mean humans rarely change, they got the behavioural patterns needed and now they don't want anyone else to get this data and these restrictions are actually helping big tech or this data quickly deteriorates and fresh data on humans is needed all the time, so it's useful after all for Europeans.

Why is Facebook any worse than Google?

"if you're planning to steal 700 pieces of information from me and then use it in 700 ways, you need to ask me 1,400 questions and get a Yes to each of them."

That sounds about as fun as the Metaverse :P

Are EU firms being scrutinized as much as American ones? Are these GDPR penalties on American businesses a protectionist measure by the EU?

They are. Not only companies but government organizations are fined too.

You can see it here: https://www.enforcementtracker.com/

While it's possible the US just has more tech companies, I think it should be pointed out the top fines here are to Amazon Inc, Meta Platforms Inc, Meta Platforms Inc, WhatsApp Inc (owned by Meta), Google LLC, Facebook Ireland Ltd, Google Ireland Ltd and Google.

Top fines are still American but definitely far from exclusive.

I don't know of any EU corporates with the scale, reach and depth of US corporates such as Meta, Google, Twitter et al. Their dominance globally is going to prompt GDPR scrutiny. If an EU corporate were to grow to relative relevance, I'd expect similar scrutiny. I see no protectionism, largely because there's nothing to protect.

What EU firms? The EU is starved in big tech, and doesn’t have nearly the international impact as Silicon Valley/ US. Many EU companies that get big move to the US (eg Spotify).

If the EU was host to surveillance advertising I’m sure the narrative would be that companies should provide services cheaply instead for the social good. While you can have whatever opinions you want on invasive tracking tech, the reality is that the EU never had their share of profits from it and have always been more critical of US based companies. Yes they’re protectionist.

Edit: it can be good for consumers and good for national protectionism. I’m not questioning if it’s good for consumers but it is definitely good for nationalism.

This is pretty similar to a common argument that we see on HN: "Apple cares more about user privacy because the bulk of their revenue comes from selling devices, not ads".

The issue here is whether Apple's pivot to services and advertising revenue will corrupt their privacy protections. Similarly, we can wonder if EU privacy protections will vanish if a future adtech unicorn gets born in France or Germany.

It's not really a question if but if enough of their revenue comes from selling ads they have to push it to the legal limit. Companies are suppose to make money but do so within the law. Of course they do have to create their own policies where laws are oddly missing but I imagine more of that kind of fuzzy logic would be the last thing big tech is interested in.

> The issue here is whether Apple's pivot to services and advertising revenue will corrupt their privacy protections

Considering the way they treat FB data collection vs their own data collection… I’d guess yes. Apple has a not-so-subtle growth in ads that we’ve been hearing rumors about, and I wouldn’t be surprised to see a suit from Eg. Facebook. Apple ads will focus on app content - which the biggest competition used to facebook.

> Similarly, we can wonder if EU privacy protections will vanish if a future adtech unicorn gets born in France or Germany

I think the bigger likelihood is that this cements the reality that no new ad-tech giants will emerge. If you ban geese, you’ll never get a golden one.

> What EU firms?

All dealing with personal data, not just tech. Hotels, hospitals, retailers, banks, government organizations, insurance brokers, education institutions, and so on.

The US uses fines of EU companies as a strategic tool so I think that the EU hitting US companies with GDPR fines is fair.

Yawn. The US is passing straight protectionist laws and most of the American fines for embargo violations are targeting foreign companies. At this point talking about reciprocity is a joke. If the EU had modicum of a backbone, we would straight up ban American companies from sensitive markets and put tariff on the rest.

>Facebook will doubtless appeal, but the writing is on the wall here: it's the end of the line for surveillance advertising in Europe, an affluent territory with 500m+ residents.

Left unsaid in this.... facebook will spend whatever amount of money it takes to win on appeal.

There is likely no amount of money that can do so. So let’s hope they bankrupt themselves trying

I guess this is sort of pedantic, sorry, but the EU is about 450M. The EEA adds a few million more. Europe as a whole is larger than the EU.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com