5 ms·

Child labor laws and minimum wage also made some revenue models untenable, and the world is better off for it. I want to live in a world where businesses can pr

Child labor laws and minimum wage also made some revenue models untenable, and the world is better off for it. I want to live in a world where businesses can profit without having to spy on people. This is a good step in that direction.

whimsicalism 4y ago
Spy on people? If you like a post on Instagram it is core to their service that they log that information. If they didn't, the app wouldn't work very well.
- britneybitch 4y ago
  "Personal data" as mentioned in the article includes more than just logging what posts you liked. I'm sure you knew that already.
  - jefftk 4y ago
    My reading here is that an "instagram lite" that: 1. Showed you posts 2. Used what posts you liked to show you more posts you'd like 3. Also used that data to show you ads you're more likely to click on 4. Didn't give you a free choice on whether they did (3) Would still be illegal under the GDPR.
    - whimsicalism 4y ago
      Yes, it is the post-hoc analysis that is the issue, not the "spying" which is just the modern-day spin on standard logging and business processes.
      - timeon 4y ago
        If you do not prefer term "spying", "voyeurism" fits as well.
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
    - jdiez17 4y ago
      That’s my understanding as well. Point 4 being the key factor. They would have to ask, and give a clear yes/no option, on whether the user wants ads to be personalized based on their previous activity on the app (which posts they have liked, how many seconds they spent looking at posts, etc.) Otherwise, the ads would be based solely on the context that they are displayed in. Which seems perfectly fine to me.
- simongray 4y ago
  Why do you participate in discussion about the GDPR when you clearly know nothing about it? Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR. The illegal part is about processing or forwarding personal data of users to third parties, when users haven't agreed to that aspect of the "service". You usually see the distinction between "functional" and "advertising" cookies in those annoying banners, where you of course can't disable the former as that data is core to the functionality of the website. And guess what, if you don't do any shady stuff with user data you don't even need to display any banner (the banner is for getting explicit permission from the user to potentially do shady stuff).
  - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
    > Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR I’ve heard many “of course X or Y” pertaining to GDPR that turned out wrong. Because it’s a law interpreted by twenty-seven separate DPAs. GDPR’s aims are good. But there is legitimate criticism in its design.
    - simongray 4y ago
      If you work in a European company that has a web presence and/or collects data, you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now. I don't blame Americans or others for not knowing this, but the amount of bad takes about the GDPR by Silicon Valley people in particular is so ridiculous. Every single comment section about a GDPR topic on HN has a bunch of Americans talking about how Europe is some backwards, regulatory hellhole, always talking from a position of total ignorance.
      - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
        > you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now Again, I hear this sort of thing all the time. Then you ask lawyers and lobbyists and get a host of opinions, many of which stick depending on which DPA one approaches or complains to. As a competitive stick, it’s dangerously dynamic.
- sp332 4y ago
  If I navigate to a page that embeds a Facebook "Like" button, Facebook tracks that I visited that page even if I don't click the button.
  - astrange 4y ago
    This article doesn’t seem to be about tracking.
wccrawford 4y ago
I think their point wasn't the regulations, but the unpredictability of those regulations. It's hard to start a business if you're worried the rug will be pulled out from under you at some point in the future.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- Nextgrid 4y ago
  The GDPR is only unpredictable if your business model is at best in a grey area with regards to it. The spirit of the law is actually very clear, and should your business model be compatible with it, you will be fine. It isn't Europe's fault that the tech industry's only business model for the past decade has been about misusing personal data in ways people didn't expect or consent to (otherwise GDPR would not be a problem again since people will willingly opt-in).
- DoughnutHole 4y ago
  > unpredictability The EU regulators have been remarkably consistent in their rulings. The GDPR is quite clear that tracking for advertising purposes requires explicit consent and an opt-out. Meta's case has always been relying on a very generous interpretation of the 'contractual necessity' clause of article 6. The only source of unpredictability is the apparent collaboration between the Irish regulator and Meta - this is the 4th time in a row they've been overruled. Much like our overruled tax arrangements we're apparently bending over backwards to keep tech multinationals happy for as long as possible.
okayman123 4y ago
Aggregate all the harms ever suffered by everyone in all of history from all kinds of ad tracking, and the total harm will be less than a single child laboring a single day on a single thing. Besides, the EU isn’t like, banning clothing imports, which have all sorts of EU illegal stuff in their supply chains, because those are EU businesses. Obviously people agree in principle that there are socially bad business models. I don’t think child labor and ad tracking are remotely comparable. Where do you draw the line? The honest answer is, whatever you get stylized-outraged about, because you have limited intellectual bandwidth and your job isn’t to figure shit out like this.

whimsicalism 4y ago

Spy on people? If you like a post on Instagram it is core to their service that they log that information. If they didn't, the app wouldn't work very well.

britneybitch 4y ago
"Personal data" as mentioned in the article includes more than just logging what posts you liked. I'm sure you knew that already.
- jefftk 4y ago
  My reading here is that an "instagram lite" that: 1. Showed you posts 2. Used what posts you liked to show you more posts you'd like 3. Also used that data to show you ads you're more likely to click on 4. Didn't give you a free choice on whether they did (3) Would still be illegal under the GDPR.
  - whimsicalism 4y ago
    Yes, it is the post-hoc analysis that is the issue, not the "spying" which is just the modern-day spin on standard logging and business processes.
    - timeon 4y ago
      If you do not prefer term "spying", "voyeurism" fits as well.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - jdiez17 4y ago
    That’s my understanding as well. Point 4 being the key factor. They would have to ask, and give a clear yes/no option, on whether the user wants ads to be personalized based on their previous activity on the app (which posts they have liked, how many seconds they spent looking at posts, etc.) Otherwise, the ads would be based solely on the context that they are displayed in. Which seems perfectly fine to me.
simongray 4y ago
Why do you participate in discussion about the GDPR when you clearly know nothing about it? Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR. The illegal part is about processing or forwarding personal data of users to third parties, when users haven't agreed to that aspect of the "service". You usually see the distinction between "functional" and "advertising" cookies in those annoying banners, where you of course can't disable the former as that data is core to the functionality of the website. And guess what, if you don't do any shady stuff with user data you don't even need to display any banner (the banner is for getting explicit permission from the user to potentially do shady stuff).
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > Of course a "like" or any kind of data that is core to the service doesn't infringe the GDPR I’ve heard many “of course X or Y” pertaining to GDPR that turned out wrong. Because it’s a law interpreted by twenty-seven separate DPAs. GDPR’s aims are good. But there is legitimate criticism in its design.
  - simongray 4y ago
    If you work in a European company that has a web presence and/or collects data, you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now. I don't blame Americans or others for not knowing this, but the amount of bad takes about the GDPR by Silicon Valley people in particular is so ridiculous. Every single comment section about a GDPR topic on HN has a bunch of Americans talking about how Europe is some backwards, regulatory hellhole, always talking from a position of total ignorance.
    - JumpCrisscross 4y ago
      > you should be familiar with what is/isn't personal data by now Again, I hear this sort of thing all the time. Then you ask lawyers and lobbyists and get a host of opinions, many of which stick depending on which DPA one approaches or complains to. As a competitive stick, it’s dangerously dynamic.
sp332 4y ago
If I navigate to a page that embeds a Facebook "Like" button, Facebook tracks that I visited that page even if I don't click the button.
- astrange 4y ago
  This article doesn’t seem to be about tracking.

wccrawford 4y ago

I think their point wasn't the regulations, but the unpredictability of those regulations. It's hard to start a business if you're worried the rug will be pulled out from under you at some point in the future.

deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
Nextgrid 4y ago
The GDPR is only unpredictable if your business model is at best in a grey area with regards to it. The spirit of the law is actually very clear, and should your business model be compatible with it, you will be fine. It isn't Europe's fault that the tech industry's only business model for the past decade has been about misusing personal data in ways people didn't expect or consent to (otherwise GDPR would not be a problem again since people will willingly opt-in).
DoughnutHole 4y ago
> unpredictability The EU regulators have been remarkably consistent in their rulings. The GDPR is quite clear that tracking for advertising purposes requires explicit consent and an opt-out. Meta's case has always been relying on a very generous interpretation of the 'contractual necessity' clause of article 6. The only source of unpredictability is the apparent collaboration between the Irish regulator and Meta - this is the 4th time in a row they've been overruled. Much like our overruled tax arrangements we're apparently bending over backwards to keep tech multinationals happy for as long as possible.

okayman123 4y ago

Aggregate all the harms ever suffered by everyone in all of history from all kinds of ad tracking, and the total harm will be less than a single child laboring a single day on a single thing. Besides, the EU isn’t like, banning clothing imports, which have all sorts of EU illegal stuff in their supply chains, because those are EU businesses. Obviously people agree in principle that there are socially bad business models. I don’t think child labor and ad tracking are remotely comparable. Where do you draw the line? The honest answer is, whatever you get stylized-outraged about, because you have limited intellectual bandwidth and your job isn’t to figure shit out like this.