4 ms·

No shit. That's not the point. The point is that the world's largest privacy abuser can now directly tie all of your online habits to your government issued ID

by mbesto 6y ago

No shit. That's not the point. The point is that the world's largest privacy abuser can now directly tie all of your online habits to your government issued ID. The implications here are staggering.

weego 6y ago
If they're regulated in the sense they're suggesting then no they can't
s3r3nity 6y ago
This isn't a vote of support for FB, but I've said it before and it bears repeating: you are naive if you think you _can't_ do this today. There are companies doing this pretty well (ex: DMP's, or "data management platforms.")
- mbesto 6y ago
  Agreed, but DMPs aren't perfect, they aren't considered source of truth, and are used largely for targeting for advertising. However in this case there can be serious implications outside of simply advertising and the data integrity issues with DMPs now begins to lessen.
- est31 6y ago
  To add to this, with the argument of fighting terrorism, since a while Governments around the world have been requiring phone numbers to be only given to people who identify themselves by their government issued ID. And guess what Facebook etc. are requiring at login. Phone numbers. For security they claim, yet they send spam messages to the number.
- basch 6y ago
  If you are giving them your PII to verify your identity, doesn't that means they already have a PII database to compare you against? Id be pretty shocked if anybody here had a FB account, under a pseudonym, and they actually believed they were keeping their true identity hidden from FB. If you have an account, they know who you are. Verifying your ID is a due diligence on their part to CYA. How many people, saying they would never give info over to FB, willingly hand it over to the fintechs like Robinhood?
_eht 6y ago
They are already collecting GID if you use FB for anything more than creeping these days.
freedomben 6y ago
> No shit. I think you could have gotten your point across without the rudeness. Talking to people like that creates a toxic environment. I fully agree that there is no way I'm giving that info to FB. I noped out of running ads with them because they wanted my ID. My privacy is invaded enough by them, no thanks.
- sinatra 6y ago
  > I think you could have gotten your point across without the rudeness. Talking to people like that creates a toxic environment. Thank you for calling this out. To some, this may seem like over-reaction, but only by calling even minimally rude statements out can we ensure that HN doesn't become Reddit.
  - mbesto 6y ago
    FWIW - GP here, it wasn't intended to be rude, but more of an agreement that KYC exists but is totally besides the point. I'm sorry if it came off any other way than that.
    - sinatra 6y ago
      Yes, I thought so (that you didn’t intend for it to be rude).
kerng 6y ago
With more then 99% confidence, FB, Google and Amazon, Visa, Mastercard can all do this today already.

by mbesto 6y ago

No shit. That's not the point. The point is that the world's largest privacy abuser can now directly tie all of your online habits to your government issued ID. The implications here are staggering.

weego 6y ago

If they're regulated in the sense they're suggesting then no they can't

s3r3nity 6y ago

This isn't a vote of support for FB, but I've said it before and it bears repeating: you are naive if you think you _can't_ do this today. There are companies doing this pretty well (ex: DMP's, or "data management platforms.")

mbesto 6y ago
Agreed, but DMPs aren't perfect, they aren't considered source of truth, and are used largely for targeting for advertising. However in this case there can be serious implications outside of simply advertising and the data integrity issues with DMPs now begins to lessen.
est31 6y ago
To add to this, with the argument of fighting terrorism, since a while Governments around the world have been requiring phone numbers to be only given to people who identify themselves by their government issued ID. And guess what Facebook etc. are requiring at login. Phone numbers. For security they claim, yet they send spam messages to the number.
basch 6y ago
If you are giving them your PII to verify your identity, doesn't that means they already have a PII database to compare you against? Id be pretty shocked if anybody here had a FB account, under a pseudonym, and they actually believed they were keeping their true identity hidden from FB. If you have an account, they know who you are. Verifying your ID is a due diligence on their part to CYA. How many people, saying they would never give info over to FB, willingly hand it over to the fintechs like Robinhood?

_eht 6y ago

They are already collecting GID if you use FB for anything more than creeping these days.

freedomben 6y ago

> No shit. I think you could have gotten your point across without the rudeness. Talking to people like that creates a toxic environment. I fully agree that there is no way I'm giving that info to FB. I noped out of running ads with them because they wanted my ID. My privacy is invaded enough by them, no thanks.

sinatra 6y ago
> I think you could have gotten your point across without the rudeness. Talking to people like that creates a toxic environment. Thank you for calling this out. To some, this may seem like over-reaction, but only by calling even minimally rude statements out can we ensure that HN doesn't become Reddit.
- mbesto 6y ago
  FWIW - GP here, it wasn't intended to be rude, but more of an agreement that KYC exists but is totally besides the point. I'm sorry if it came off any other way than that.
  - sinatra 6y ago
    Yes, I thought so (that you didn’t intend for it to be rude).

kerng 6y ago

With more then 99% confidence, FB, Google and Amazon, Visa, Mastercard can all do this today already.