6 ms·

We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. It's ridiculous. The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology

by nothis 8y ago

We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. It's ridiculous. The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology so no reason to worry about it.

buboard 8y ago
is the 5 years some kind of future roadmap? Also, why should this method be illegal?
- dmead 8y ago
  if this is not illegal, why even have a CIA? why shouldn't the government just pay facebook for data access?
  - giancarlostoro 8y ago
    I usually make the joke that Google / Facebook are the NSA.
  - Jill_the_Pill 8y ago
    Do you think they don't?
  - buboard 8y ago
    > the government just pay facebook That's ridiculous. Imagine the outcry if the US government had to pay facebook for that. horror! but thanks to the NSA and coercion, it's all free.
- interlocutor 8y ago
  This should be illegal because I have a right to privacy. Corporations should have my permission in order to store, process and sell information about me.
  - buboard 8y ago
    right , facebook can ask you for this permission when uploading the photos. But that doesnt make the algorithm itself illegal.
  - threeseed 8y ago
    Comments like this make no sense to me. You gave Facebook your data and agreed with a ToS that states pretty clearly this is what they will do. And then are upset when they do it ?
    - dwd 8y ago
      And for others in the photo, some of whom may not have an account, did FaceBook get their permission to generate meta data about them?
      - squarefoot 8y ago
        Which brings us to a similar issue: what if I don't want my voice being recorded, analyzed and tracked by digital assistants? How do I prevent companies from profiling my habits by using other peoples devices?
        dwd 8y ago
        Good point! This was discussed a bit when people started wearing Google Glasses and creeped out strangers who didn't want to be recorded. Could be a hard one. I imagine that the voice recognition is processed in the cloud, where for privacy it should be on the device. As it is, there's no need for the Government to bend the law to store meta data on citizens; these companies do it all for them.
    - interlocutor 8y ago
      Yes. Steve Kroft: "You signed on. You made the deal." Max Schrems: The individual doesn't have the power, the time, the legal expertise to understand any of that. And then you're sitting at home at your desk and have the option to only say yes. This is not what any reasonable person would consider a fair deal. Read more here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gdpr-the-law-that-lets-europe-take-back-their-data-from-big-tech-companies-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gdpr-the-law-that-lets-europe-t...
- gerdesj 8y ago
  When reading the article, was your instinctive response: "cool use of technology" or "ooooh, creepy"? This is a very large international corporation deriving additional information about you based on something that you have shared. This is of course a major part of the very modus operandi of FB n Co. We are all dimly aware of things like shadow profiles and the like and that our mobile (cell) contacts are mined routinely and cross referenced. Our browsers spew personally identifiable info. and so do our browsing habits. This is all very new (15 years or so) and very odd (hasn't happened before). FB, Google and all the other data miners for ads for cash pushers are a new phenomenon. These companies are massive, international and seemingly insensitive to anything that doesn't adversely affect their bottom line. Now we have an example of FB proudly attempting to patent a creepy (my term) process because it is now considered normal. I'm not sure I like the kind of environment that allows FB to consider that sort of process as being potentially patentable. Actually I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that that sort of process being patentable is normal. I'm going to tentatively label that sort of environment as toxic.
  - buboard 8y ago
    I 'd say mildly cool use of technology, considering the current state of machinelearning this doesnt seem groundbreaking. the creepiness depends on how it is going to be used. As I am not a facebook user, this FB-phobia seems a little bizarre to me. I am certainly not for throwing out all tech because of possible creepiness.
    - gerdesj 8y ago
      I'm not exactly a Luddite myself (my 4.19 Linux kernel is compiling right now) but I'm old enough to see a few trends come and go (47). I'm CREST accredited, MD with two partners and 20 employees. I do have a FB account (named as per my name here) and don't get me wrong, it is quite handy for keeping in touch and having ads blasted at me in return. OK, I use Privacy Badger, uBlock O and a few other tricks to attempt to tame the tsunami of crap. As you say, it is very much: "mildly cool use of tech." but it is also insidious and corrosive when you look at the effect it has. I am not advocating throwing out all tech (I'm fitting up Home Assistant at home right now, carefully) but I am pointing out that what is seen as normal today is not what was seen as normal a few years ago.
giancarlostoro 8y ago
> The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology so no reason to worry about it. The technology was available for as long as people have had smartphones and social media, smartphones specifically due to their geolocation capabilities. I'm just surprised if they only just now started doing this.
- bordercases 8y ago
  No one is logically omniscient. And it shouldn't be a reason to not regulate just because we could have regulated sooner.
  - giancarlostoro 8y ago
    > No one is logically omniscient. And it shouldn't be a reason to not regulate just because we could have regulated sooner. True, though it seems me and a few others in this thread thought they were already doing this. They at least should have a rough idea by what users already tell Facebook, but I guess they want to make it even more aware of people who don't tell Facebook everything about their personal lives. I also found it creepy that Instagram had Bluetooth data enabled, like if it wants to know where I am and compare it with where other people are by keeping track of bluetooth devices around me, of course it could just be some weird Android permissions thing I usually don't give apps permissions and reset them occasionally though.
kodablah 8y ago
One hopeful side effect of such laws would be reduced substanceless whining. Day after day is deja vu with these articles and the comment sections. This is not an indictment of HN as it's an accurate microcosm of opinion of the non-silent masses. Sadly, the whining would shift to non-compliance and non-enforcement as has occurred with GDPR and its predecessors.
noarchy 8y ago
>We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. No doubt the EU governments themselves will not be beholden to such regulations.
- shaki-dora 8y ago
  All EU privacy legislation, such as the recent GDPR, apply to government entities exactly as they apply to private companies. (When your cynicism gets so bad that you just support your rage against everything with made-up facts, that effectively removes any incentives for politicians to do good. Why bother, when your actions never even make it to all the red-faced constituents screaming all sorts of invectives at whenever you appear in public?)
706f6f70 8y ago
I just hope the EU has the foresight to make the legislation enforceable in a post-EU European legal environment.

by nothis 8y ago

We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. It's ridiculous. The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology so no reason to worry about it.

buboard 8y ago

is the 5 years some kind of future roadmap? Also, why should this method be illegal?

dmead 8y ago
if this is not illegal, why even have a CIA? why shouldn't the government just pay facebook for data access?
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  I usually make the joke that Google / Facebook are the NSA.
- Jill_the_Pill 8y ago
  Do you think they don't?
- buboard 8y ago
  > the government just pay facebook That's ridiculous. Imagine the outcry if the US government had to pay facebook for that. horror! but thanks to the NSA and coercion, it's all free.
interlocutor 8y ago
This should be illegal because I have a right to privacy. Corporations should have my permission in order to store, process and sell information about me.
- buboard 8y ago
  right , facebook can ask you for this permission when uploading the photos. But that doesnt make the algorithm itself illegal.
- threeseed 8y ago
  Comments like this make no sense to me. You gave Facebook your data and agreed with a ToS that states pretty clearly this is what they will do. And then are upset when they do it ?
  - dwd 8y ago
    And for others in the photo, some of whom may not have an account, did FaceBook get their permission to generate meta data about them?
    - squarefoot 8y ago
      Which brings us to a similar issue: what if I don't want my voice being recorded, analyzed and tracked by digital assistants? How do I prevent companies from profiling my habits by using other peoples devices?
      - dwd 8y ago
        Good point! This was discussed a bit when people started wearing Google Glasses and creeped out strangers who didn't want to be recorded. Could be a hard one. I imagine that the voice recognition is processed in the cloud, where for privacy it should be on the device. As it is, there's no need for the Government to bend the law to store meta data on citizens; these companies do it all for them.
  - interlocutor 8y ago
    Yes. Steve Kroft: "You signed on. You made the deal." Max Schrems: The individual doesn't have the power, the time, the legal expertise to understand any of that. And then you're sitting at home at your desk and have the option to only say yes. This is not what any reasonable person would consider a fair deal. Read more here: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gdpr-the-law-that-lets-europe-take-back-their-data-from-big-tech-companies-60-minutes/ https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gdpr-the-law-that-lets-europe-t...
gerdesj 8y ago
When reading the article, was your instinctive response: "cool use of technology" or "ooooh, creepy"? This is a very large international corporation deriving additional information about you based on something that you have shared. This is of course a major part of the very modus operandi of FB n Co. We are all dimly aware of things like shadow profiles and the like and that our mobile (cell) contacts are mined routinely and cross referenced. Our browsers spew personally identifiable info. and so do our browsing habits. This is all very new (15 years or so) and very odd (hasn't happened before). FB, Google and all the other data miners for ads for cash pushers are a new phenomenon. These companies are massive, international and seemingly insensitive to anything that doesn't adversely affect their bottom line. Now we have an example of FB proudly attempting to patent a creepy (my term) process because it is now considered normal. I'm not sure I like the kind of environment that allows FB to consider that sort of process as being potentially patentable. Actually I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that that sort of process being patentable is normal. I'm going to tentatively label that sort of environment as toxic.
- buboard 8y ago
  I 'd say mildly cool use of technology, considering the current state of machinelearning this doesnt seem groundbreaking. the creepiness depends on how it is going to be used. As I am not a facebook user, this FB-phobia seems a little bizarre to me. I am certainly not for throwing out all tech because of possible creepiness.
  - gerdesj 8y ago
    I'm not exactly a Luddite myself (my 4.19 Linux kernel is compiling right now) but I'm old enough to see a few trends come and go (47). I'm CREST accredited, MD with two partners and 20 employees. I do have a FB account (named as per my name here) and don't get me wrong, it is quite handy for keeping in touch and having ads blasted at me in return. OK, I use Privacy Badger, uBlock O and a few other tricks to attempt to tame the tsunami of crap. As you say, it is very much: "mildly cool use of tech." but it is also insidious and corrosive when you look at the effect it has. I am not advocating throwing out all tech (I'm fitting up Home Assistant at home right now, carefully) but I am pointing out that what is seen as normal today is not what was seen as normal a few years ago.

giancarlostoro 8y ago

> The only reason it's not illegal is that we never had the technology so no reason to worry about it. The technology was available for as long as people have had smartphones and social media, smartphones specifically due to their geolocation capabilities. I'm just surprised if they only just now started doing this.

bordercases 8y ago
No one is logically omniscient. And it shouldn't be a reason to not regulate just because we could have regulated sooner.
- giancarlostoro 8y ago
  > No one is logically omniscient. And it shouldn't be a reason to not regulate just because we could have regulated sooner. True, though it seems me and a few others in this thread thought they were already doing this. They at least should have a rough idea by what users already tell Facebook, but I guess they want to make it even more aware of people who don't tell Facebook everything about their personal lives. I also found it creepy that Instagram had Bluetooth data enabled, like if it wants to know where I am and compare it with where other people are by keeping track of bluetooth devices around me, of course it could just be some weird Android permissions thing I usually don't give apps permissions and reset them occasionally though.

kodablah 8y ago

One hopeful side effect of such laws would be reduced substanceless whining. Day after day is deja vu with these articles and the comment sections. This is not an indictment of HN as it's an accurate microcosm of opinion of the non-silent masses. Sadly, the whining would shift to non-compliance and non-enforcement as has occurred with GDPR and its predecessors.

noarchy 8y ago

>We're 5 years away from this shit being regulated away in Europe for good. No doubt the EU governments themselves will not be beholden to such regulations.

shaki-dora 8y ago
All EU privacy legislation, such as the recent GDPR, apply to government entities exactly as they apply to private companies. (When your cynicism gets so bad that you just support your rage against everything with made-up facts, that effectively removes any incentives for politicians to do good. Why bother, when your actions never even make it to all the red-faced constituents screaming all sorts of invectives at whenever you appear in public?)

706f6f70 8y ago

I just hope the EU has the foresight to make the legislation enforceable in a post-EU European legal environment.