3 ms·

There is a big difference between "refusing a legal act" and refusing to act on unverified information. If it was a GDPR complaint, it should go through the GDP

There is a big difference between "refusing a legal act" and refusing to act on unverified information. If it was a GDPR complaint, it should go through the GDPR courts. That's how the system is designed. Deleting a user's picture incorrectly is absolutely a problem. You now have an avenue for malicious actors to effectively DDOS users by removing all of their photographs with these GDPR requests

boomboomsubban 6y ago
>You now have an avenue for malicious actors to effectively DDOS users by removing all of their photographs with these GDPR requests My entire post was just detailing the US system already in place, where they have the powers you described. These malicious actors could only target people under the age of thirteen, there would be little incentive to do such except bullying, and the culprit would like face punishment. I would hate to see it happen to any child personally, but from Facebook's position there is no risk to them taking it down while leaving the picture up could carry a $40,000 fine.
- andrewxdiamond 6y ago
  How does Facebook know how old people are in pictures? I mean they invest a lot of time and money into AI, but I don't think they're there yet
  - boomboomsubban 6y ago
    By their Facebook account, it's the persons current age that matters. I don't know what they do if they don't have one, but I doubt many people without accounts would be targeted for an attack.
    - andrewxdiamond 6y ago
      Ah yes. The most accurate and impossible to forge form of identification, the Facebook page
      - boomboomsubban 6y ago
        The account asking for the removal being tagged (having their listed dependent tagged,) in a bunch of pictures they want removed gives a pretty good hint. This system has existed for all of Facebook's history, and doesn't seem to he a huge source of problems. It's abusable, but it takes a decent amount of work, the risk is rather high, and there is no payoff for abusing it. No matter how little we like the system, it functions fine

boomboomsubban 6y ago

>You now have an avenue for malicious actors to effectively DDOS users by removing all of their photographs with these GDPR requests My entire post was just detailing the US system already in place, where they have the powers you described. These malicious actors could only target people under the age of thirteen, there would be little incentive to do such except bullying, and the culprit would like face punishment. I would hate to see it happen to any child personally, but from Facebook's position there is no risk to them taking it down while leaving the picture up could carry a $40,000 fine.

andrewxdiamond 6y ago
How does Facebook know how old people are in pictures? I mean they invest a lot of time and money into AI, but I don't think they're there yet
- boomboomsubban 6y ago
  By their Facebook account, it's the persons current age that matters. I don't know what they do if they don't have one, but I doubt many people without accounts would be targeted for an attack.
  - andrewxdiamond 6y ago
    Ah yes. The most accurate and impossible to forge form of identification, the Facebook page
    - boomboomsubban 6y ago
      The account asking for the removal being tagged (having their listed dependent tagged,) in a bunch of pictures they want removed gives a pretty good hint. This system has existed for all of Facebook's history, and doesn't seem to he a huge source of problems. It's abusable, but it takes a decent amount of work, the risk is rather high, and there is no payoff for abusing it. No matter how little we like the system, it functions fine