6 ms·
Germany Restricts Facebook’s Data Gathering
- johannes1234321 8y agoDiscussion already in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19104098 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=19104098
- redm 8y agoI must be missing something because Google collects more information from more sources for more advertising. I'm more worried about Google. * fixed a spelling error from the mobile post.
- Retric 8y agoAs I recall, Facebook was allowed to buy Whatsapp in France after they promised not to share user data between the two services. I think Germany had similar objections, but now Facebook is ignoring that agreement which always annoys governments. Facebook even got a $122 million EU fine for same issue https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/18/facebook-european-commission-fine-whatsapp-data-sharing/ https://www.engadget.com/2017/05/18/facebook-european-commis.... “After months of deliberation, the European Commission has ruled that Facebook intentionally mislead officials over its ability to utilize data following its acquisition of WhatsApp in 2014.”
- maxxxxx 8y agoThey really have to start going after the people themselves. Right now it’s way too easy to do something and then hide behind the company. Things will never change if the company pays the fines.
- Radle 8y agoalso google didn't have any big leaks, while facebook is running from one scandal into the next. Obviously facebook cannot be trusted with user data.
- 908087 8y agoContrary to the belief of whataboutists everywhere, it is actually possible to be concerned about more than one thing at a time.
- paulvorobyev 8y agoI don't understand accusations of whataboutism. They oftentimes seem hypocritical: accusing someone of whataboutism is as relevant (and therefore, by its own logic, as rhetorically valid) as the thing it seeks to criticize. Why is exposing double standards and hypocrisies via a relevant example not a valid form of argumentation?
- mehrdadn 8y agoDepends what it's trying to argue: is mentioning other instances of a problem a counter-argument meant to suggest the original isn't such a big problem that needs resolving, or is it an extension of it that pushes for those other problems also being addressed? The problem is the former.
- philipov 8y agoWhataboutism is a rhetorical tactic employing logical fallacy. It seeks to shut down discussion by creating an equivalence between two situations and implying that one is justified by not having gone after the other. It imposes a recursive loop of inaction where you can't change anything unless you change everything at the same time. You want to fix Facebook; well, what about Google? You want to fix Google; what about Facebook? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Whataboutism
- checkyoursudo 8y agoOne can also legitimately bring up other examples to ask why they aren't being treated similarly without it being whataboutism in every case. It sometimes can be difficult to distinguish when someone is using another example to excuse the primary subject with whataboutism or to make a sincere inquiry into why such a disparity exists. Of course, sometimes it's easy to tell what people are doing.
- mtgx 8y agoWell, yes, I would say this applies to to Google, too: > (i) Facebook-owned services like WhatsApp and Instagram can continue to collect data. However, assigning the data to Facebook user accounts will only be possible subject to the users’ voluntary consent. Where consent is not given, the data must remain with the respective service and cannot be processed in combination with Facebook data. https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Meldung/EN/Pressemitteilungen/2019/07_02_2019_Facebook.html https://www.bundeskartellamt.de/SharedDocs/Meldung/EN/Presse... Google and Microsoft both combined user data under one account to "improve users' experience", and gave up the practice of deanonymizing the collected data in the process, because "who's going to stop us, right?!": https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-dropped-ban-on-personally-identifiable-web-tracking https://www.propublica.org/article/google-has-quietly-droppe...
- Grollicus 8y agoThis is an anti-trust case. Google has no monopoly in most of their endeavors, for example there are thousands of email providers and ad networks. On the other hand, they caught themselfes a fine last year over the inability to "un-Google" Android phones: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/technology/google-eu-android-fine.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/18/technology/google-eu-andr...
- bubblethink 8y agoThere has been no corresponding action in the US regarding the vendors' ability to sell phones without google play services. Which is a shame because I doubt if EU alone is a big enough market for vendors to create new products without google play services. At least there haven't been any such announcements about new products since the ruling. Is EFF or any other body putting pressure in the US ?
- simplecomplex 8y agoIs it illegal to sell phones with google play services? Which law? Which case is this?
- bubblethink 8y agoWithout. TLDR: If you as a vendor sell a single phone with google play services, you cannot sell any other AOSP based phone without google play services. EU ruled against this. I don't know how the US allows this.
- nabla9 8y agoCompetition laws and anti-monopoly laws hit long before monopolies are formed. Real monopolies are relatively rare. Most anti-monopoly regulations worry about 'monopoly power' or 'dominant power' where companies can start to ignore competition or price signals. For the purpose of controlling mergers, the combined market share of 25% or more of a specific market is usually refereed to anti-trust regulators who can intervene or set conditions.
- philipov 8y agoWe'll get to them too. Just cause you're worried about Google doesn't mean we shouldn't also go after Facebook.
- finnjohnsen2 8y agoyes exactly, and Im so grateful germany taking a firm lead on this
- finnjohnsen2 8y agothe ordering germany makes when going after them is irrelevant
- Cyclone_ 8y agoThis will have a big impact on how much data they will have for advertisers, I'm glad i sold off all my stock in them since I can see other governments wanting to enact similar laws.
- srkmno 8y agoEurope is using every institution available to hamper US companies, I wonder how the Eisenhower administration would have responded. Edit: funny how here you get downvoted to oblivion for saying something negative about the EU even if it's verifiably correct.
- laumars 8y agoWhy does everything have to come back to borders and national identity? Is it really that hard to believe that bad things might get punished simply because they're bad?
- Nasrudith 8y agoBecause they seem very insincere about essentially given other scandals and policies. If you want to be considered principled you need to do so when it isn't just convenient. Otherwise it will be rightfully called out as a pretext. Given their own spying, Airbus illegal subsidy scandal combined with fierce protectionism of the most stupidly provincial things like what cheese and wine can be called and openly "How can we tear US tech down?" statements it is no wonder they are getting taken seriously as J. Jamison on Spiderman.
- laumars 8y ago> Given their own spying Are you able to expand on that please? > Airbus illegal subsidy scandal I don't follow any news regarding Airbus so I can't comment on that case specifically but the EU does clamp down on European companies as well. If I had to guess why you think it only happens to American businesses then it might be just that American newspapers will focus on US businesses so you simply haven't read about EU interventions against EU businesses? To be honest, some of fines placed on companies on the mainland continent don't even make it to the UK's press - so it really wouldn't surprise me if it was never reported in the US. > fierce protectionism of the most stupidly provincial things like what cheese and wine can be called I don't agree with that much either myself but you have to bare in mind that the cheese and wine industry predate the EU by literally centuries so this isn't some new policy that the EU invented - they just chose not to disrupt it. However this probably feels alien to any American techies because the culture there is all about disrupting the status que; I'm not suggesting that's a bad thing either. But equally I can't blame the EU for protecting their provincial industries when that's all those regions have done for centuries (and it's not like the US doesn't promote it's own local industries where it can as well). > openly "How can we tear US tech down?" statements Yeah, from time to time individuals will make stupid statements but the EU is a much larger organisation than that and encompasses a variety of different cultures. I mean you wouldn't like it much if Europeans judged every CEO in Silicon Valley by the tweets made from Elon Musk yet people talk about the EU is if it was a singular individual.
- ProAm 8y agoThis is too little to late, we've already reached peak Facebook and the damage is done. These laws need to be broader than one company to be effective.
- simplecomplex 8y ago> The competition regulator ruled that Facebook would now have to obtain users’ permission before merging data from other sites. So, more useless warnings like the cookie permission pop ups littered all over the internet. Who actually thinks this is a good thing? Why?
- checkyoursudo 8y agoWould this actually create a popup littered all over the internet? Shouldn't this be a thing where, e.g., FB sends German users a message saying something like "we'd like to integrate your data -- click here to opt in"?
- simplecomplex 8y agoYou think that’s a good thing? And that the government is needed so Facebook can give users a little confirmation dialog?