3 ms·
It is utterly naive to think that Facebook does not plainly ignore the regulations here. They have done it everywhere else. And once the data is in the model, t
by zwaps 5y ago
It is utterly naive to think that Facebook does not plainly ignore the regulations here. They have done it everywhere else.
And once the data is in the model, the Goose is cooked. Who cares about a few million fine?
In fact, Facebook would be irrational not to train their algorithms on every single data point, regulations and opt outs be damned. And that people itt have found that their data says opt in no matter what they pressed in 2016 is believable evidence for that.
As always: Don’t forget what Facebook has done in terms of data leaks, political skew, impact on the pandemic and damage of teenagers on instagram.
Do not forget how well they kept this under wraps and how little remorse they have, except in proportion to the fine.
Given the past years, we know that people working at Facebook are literally mustache-twirling cartoon villains, and I wish this was exaggerated.
- jeltz 5y agoIt would be a couple of hundred million fine, but otherwise you are right. The issue with GDPR fines is that while they stop companies from continuing to do the exakt same thing (because they would be fined every year until they stop) it can still be worth the fine if you gain enough market share from violating regulations.
- helloworld11 5y agoThese kinds of behaviors won't really change until governments finally pull their heads out of their asses and ensure that regulatory violations above a certain threshold are aimed squarely at imprisoning or personally fining certain key decision makers inside a company. You know, actual people inside its structure, not just the monstrosity as a bloated, extremely wealthy business entity that can and will absorb fines as nothing more than a cost of doing business.. That they fine the corporate entity as well, sure, why not but that they also explicitly make it known that they will seek criminal charges against actual human beings who made specific choices and decisions to ignore certain major rules. Even if the top brass cover their asses with lawyers under such a regime, asking any subordinate to break rules will always be weighed with the question of "and will I be one of the ones who gets literally jailed for this being uncovered in court?" That wholly new chain of consequence-weighing might at least make blatant disregard for legal limitations more problematic for everyone at a company like FB and so many others. It might also make the leadership hesitate more because they'll rarely be sure if an employee they asked to do something illegal isn't also gathering evidence against them as he or she violates the rules under their orders. Punishing malfeasance by applying nothing more than fines to multi-billion dollar corporate entities as abstractions is absurd nonsense. And it's funny in its hypocrisy, considering how "tough on big corporations" is a popular politician's theme that gets votes, only to be forgotten by both politicians, and apparently, voters as well once someone is in a position to make rules with real weight.