15 ms·

>But Facebook said the browser extension was programmed to evade its detection systems and vacuum up user data, creating privacy concerns. The supreme irony of

>But Facebook said the browser extension was programmed to evade its detection systems and vacuum up user data, creating privacy concerns. The supreme irony of this statement coming from Facebook. That's your business model lol. For context[1], the 'unauthorized data collection' in this case that Facebook claims is happening is the data about the advertisers, not the participants in the study, who actively install an extension that collects information about what political ads are shown to a user, stripped of personally identifying information. This sounds like getting a political campaign ad in the mailbox, reporting that to a local study and then getting terminated by the mail company for violating the campaigns privacy, that's some real bizarro world shit [1]https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609020/facebook-bans-academic-researchers-ad-transparency-misinformation-nyu-ad-observatory-plug-in https://www.theverge.com/2021/8/4/22609020/facebook-bans-aca...

TeMPOraL 5y ago
I'm just waiting for some clever European company to argue in US court that, since companies are people, the company should be protected by GDPR.
- krageon 5y ago
  > companies are people They're not
  - drunkpotato 5y ago
    In U.S. law, corporations exist in a bizarro-world state where they are people for some purposes where it's advantageous (to take advantage of free speech, for example), but not people where it's disadvantageous (for liability and punishment, for example; there is the meme "I'll believe that a corporation is a person when Texas executes one!"). I believe that is what GP is referring to.
    - jimktrains2 5y ago
      It's not just us law. Most countries have the ability for corporations to act as their own entity under the protection of the law. This is because companies need to sign things, like contracts, that can't be secured by any one person.
    - annowiki 5y ago
      Corporations can be held liable and punished, they can be forced to declare bankruptcy and forced to dissolve. I would call that execution. The entire purpose of Corporate Personhood is to apply these disadvantageous purposes to a corporate entity. It is also to limit liability on the stakeholders, so that if you start a company, and the company goes south, your creditors can't destroy your life by taking all of your personal assets. But when there is actual criminal activity, the liability protection of the corporation can be completely ignored and individual bad actors can be pursued in the courts. This is called "Piercing the corporate veil"[0]. Legal personhood is a legal fiction that has been granted to innumerous "entities" including the environment itself (see, for example, the Ganges River's personhood[1]. Furthermore, it does not grant full personhood for obvious reasons. A legal person cannot vote or be represented in government. I'm a liberal democrat, but god do these "Corporations aren't people" memes make me cringe. Things like limited liability and corporate personhood not only allow for incredible economic growth through financial innovation, but also provide benefit to individuals harmed by the corporation. If a corporation didn't have legal personhood, how else could a victim sue the entity and receive a settlement? The only "people" they could sue would be individual stakeholders. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person#Examples
      - TeMPOraL 5y ago
        FWIW, I think most of the real complains about legal personhood is that the punitive aspects aren't applied enough. Yes, there is "corporate death penalty", but it's hardly ever given out. And when the corporate veil is being pierced, it often seems the people stabbed are scapegoats placed in front of the blade by those who were truly responsible, and who get to still hide safely behind the veil.
- lmkg 5y ago
  The GDPR explicitly states that only natural persons have data subject rights, not legal persons.
YetAnotherNick 5y ago
Just because army is government's business doesn't mean they should allow any group to arm up and fight.
pwdisswordfish8 5y ago
‘Don’t steal, the government doesn’t like competition’

TeMPOraL 5y ago

I'm just waiting for some clever European company to argue in US court that, since companies are people, the company should be protected by GDPR.

krageon 5y ago
> companies are people They're not
- drunkpotato 5y ago
  In U.S. law, corporations exist in a bizarro-world state where they are people for some purposes where it's advantageous (to take advantage of free speech, for example), but not people where it's disadvantageous (for liability and punishment, for example; there is the meme "I'll believe that a corporation is a person when Texas executes one!"). I believe that is what GP is referring to.
  - jimktrains2 5y ago
    It's not just us law. Most countries have the ability for corporations to act as their own entity under the protection of the law. This is because companies need to sign things, like contracts, that can't be secured by any one person.
  - annowiki 5y ago
    Corporations can be held liable and punished, they can be forced to declare bankruptcy and forced to dissolve. I would call that execution. The entire purpose of Corporate Personhood is to apply these disadvantageous purposes to a corporate entity. It is also to limit liability on the stakeholders, so that if you start a company, and the company goes south, your creditors can't destroy your life by taking all of your personal assets. But when there is actual criminal activity, the liability protection of the corporation can be completely ignored and individual bad actors can be pursued in the courts. This is called "Piercing the corporate veil"[0]. Legal personhood is a legal fiction that has been granted to innumerous "entities" including the environment itself (see, for example, the Ganges River's personhood[1]. Furthermore, it does not grant full personhood for obvious reasons. A legal person cannot vote or be represented in government. I'm a liberal democrat, but god do these "Corporations aren't people" memes make me cringe. Things like limited liability and corporate personhood not only allow for incredible economic growth through financial innovation, but also provide benefit to individuals harmed by the corporation. If a corporation didn't have legal personhood, how else could a victim sue the entity and receive a settlement? The only "people" they could sue would be individual stakeholders. [0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Piercing_the_corporate_veil [1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person#Examples https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Legal_person#Examples
    - TeMPOraL 5y ago
      FWIW, I think most of the real complains about legal personhood is that the punitive aspects aren't applied enough. Yes, there is "corporate death penalty", but it's hardly ever given out. And when the corporate veil is being pierced, it often seems the people stabbed are scapegoats placed in front of the blade by those who were truly responsible, and who get to still hide safely behind the veil.
lmkg 5y ago
The GDPR explicitly states that only natural persons have data subject rights, not legal persons.

YetAnotherNick 5y ago

Just because army is government's business doesn't mean they should allow any group to arm up and fight.

pwdisswordfish8 5y ago

‘Don’t steal, the government doesn’t like competition’