4 ms·

It's strange this doesn't really talk about the option that millions of people have taken of simply not using Facebook. Max Schrems: “Fundamental rights are us

It's strange this doesn't really talk about the option that millions of people have taken of simply not using Facebook. Max Schrems: “Fundamental rights are usually available to everyone. How many people would still exercise their right to vote if they had to pay € 250 to do so? There were times when fundamental rights were reserved for the rich. It seems Meta wants to take us back for more than a hundred years.” Is Facebook a fundamental right?

red_admiral 3y ago
If meta offers facebook in the EU, then according to law, people have a fundamental right to use it without personalised advertising. Meta has the fundamental right to pull out of the EU completely and shake their fist at the sky if they disagree.
judiisis 3y ago
Privacy is a fundamental right, advertising is okay but tracking people or pay up is not
- JacobSeated 3y ago
  That, I suppose, is why ad-companies typically invest in anonymization. It may not be perfect, but it is good enough in terms of reaching an acceptable balance between respecting privacy and someone being able to monetize an app or a website imo.
  - shortsunblack 3y ago
    Anonymization of data is largely impossible. That's an opinion of many data protection experts. Combining datasets, using open-source data from gov't sources and likes allows to "single out" individuals in no time. Further, what industry does is largely pseudonimization, not anonymization. Anonymized data is not under the scope of GDPR, whereas pseudonymized data is.
dannyw 3y ago
Your fundamental rights also apply to private businesses. A gaming arcade can’t refuse entry based on your ethnicity.
Kbelicius 3y ago
> Is Facebook a fundamental right? No, but privacy is.
- karmasimida 3y ago
  Then don't use facebook.
  - throw_a_grenade 3y ago
    No, it's the other way around. Either FB offers something that aligns with the law, or they GTFO. Why it's the me(g|t)acorp that sets rules and not elected governments? Because it's their product? Because we the people are the product and not people?
    - karmasimida 3y ago
      Good, so EU can go and ban Facebook operating in EU straight up, not dancing around privacy. The EU protectionism around internet service is due to its lack of competitiveness in the whole internet economy. Or they might just outright start this trade war with US, and see how it goes.
      - throw_a_grenade 3y ago
        > EU can go and ban Facebook EU and Member States thereof can also use less drastic means to compel people and companies to follow the law. BTW we also retired capital punishment for people. We don't need 0/1 either-or constructs in law.
      - dns_snek 3y ago
        What you're saying is thay exploitation is profitable for the exploiters, making them more "competitive" on the world stage. All I can say in response is that so was slavery.
  - la_oveja 3y ago
    x restaurant will only let you eat if you show your bank account details beforehand "to make sure youll be able to pay afterwards". obviously you wont go to that restaurant, but maybe thats the workplace restaurant (environment forces you to use it). that doesnt sound good, no? privacy laws must be enforced
rsolva 3y ago
Not a fundamental right, but a fundamental part of many peoples lives, at least here in Norway. Do you have children in school? Part of a local club? And so forth. In many situations, there are no alternatives if you want to participate in society. This is of course outrageous, but non the less a reality. I have managed to stay of Metas products since 2018, but I do not have children :)
vincnetas 3y ago
Idea is that facebook can give free access to its platform or they can choose to ask for payment, but they can not accept as a payment that users would wave their right to privacy. Privacy cant be for sale like you cant (legally) sell your kidney.
- adhesive_wombat 3y ago
  > you cant (legally) sell your kidney. If Milei gets his way, you can go to Argentina!
timterim 3y ago
GDPR does not allow discrimination against users who do not want to be tracked and you have the right not to be tracked. Wether the workaround ,that makes €10 then‘ is viable has not yet been tested in the courts. General assumption is that it is not. This would result in facebook to either allow non-sanctioned opt-out or pull out of the EU.
noirscape 3y ago
The main thing you're missing is that Facebook is the big corporation the GDPR was largely written to try and reign in AND that any judgement affecting Facebook is going to have downstream effects on other providers (there's been a few news sites trying the scheme in Europe too). This is gonna be the "do or die" for the pay-or-okay scheme. Given Facebook is doing it, I wouldn't put my chances on the "do" part; they are the extreme example and EU judges don't tend to look kindly on big corporations thinking they're capable of "outsmarting" their laws. Is right to privacy while using Facebook services a fundamental right? Well, given some of the services they own - maybe they should be. WhatsApp is massive in the EU, while Instagram seems to be the replacement for Twitter for a lot of people now that Twitter itself is flooded with fools that nobody likes to interact with. We've already had Facebook suprise drop a "EULA change" on WhatsApp users that let them use WA data in the Facebook algorithms. The specific field Facebook is even in makes it unusually hard to leave. It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it. So yes, privacy when using Facebook is extremely important (GDPR literally exists to codify privacy as a right) and pay-or-okay is holding it hostage.
- robin_reala 3y ago
  While I agree with you, it’s substantially different between countries. WhatsApp is pretty much unused in Sweden, while Facebook is basically a necessity.
- generic92034 3y ago
  I agree with the gist of your reply, but I object to this part: > It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it. I can assure you that it is perfectly viable to live a normal life in a west-european society without using any Meta product. It gets a bit more difficult if you have kids at school, though, with teachers and parents not being flexible.
  - 3y ago

red_admiral 3y ago

If meta offers facebook in the EU, then according to law, people have a fundamental right to use it without personalised advertising. Meta has the fundamental right to pull out of the EU completely and shake their fist at the sky if they disagree.

judiisis 3y ago

Privacy is a fundamental right, advertising is okay but tracking people or pay up is not

JacobSeated 3y ago
That, I suppose, is why ad-companies typically invest in anonymization. It may not be perfect, but it is good enough in terms of reaching an acceptable balance between respecting privacy and someone being able to monetize an app or a website imo.
- shortsunblack 3y ago
  Anonymization of data is largely impossible. That's an opinion of many data protection experts. Combining datasets, using open-source data from gov't sources and likes allows to "single out" individuals in no time. Further, what industry does is largely pseudonimization, not anonymization. Anonymized data is not under the scope of GDPR, whereas pseudonymized data is.

dannyw 3y ago

Your fundamental rights also apply to private businesses. A gaming arcade can’t refuse entry based on your ethnicity.

Kbelicius 3y ago

> Is Facebook a fundamental right? No, but privacy is.

karmasimida 3y ago
Then don't use facebook.
- throw_a_grenade 3y ago
  No, it's the other way around. Either FB offers something that aligns with the law, or they GTFO. Why it's the me(g|t)acorp that sets rules and not elected governments? Because it's their product? Because we the people are the product and not people?
  - karmasimida 3y ago
    Good, so EU can go and ban Facebook operating in EU straight up, not dancing around privacy. The EU protectionism around internet service is due to its lack of competitiveness in the whole internet economy. Or they might just outright start this trade war with US, and see how it goes.
    - throw_a_grenade 3y ago
      > EU can go and ban Facebook EU and Member States thereof can also use less drastic means to compel people and companies to follow the law. BTW we also retired capital punishment for people. We don't need 0/1 either-or constructs in law.
    - dns_snek 3y ago
      What you're saying is thay exploitation is profitable for the exploiters, making them more "competitive" on the world stage. All I can say in response is that so was slavery.
- la_oveja 3y ago
  x restaurant will only let you eat if you show your bank account details beforehand "to make sure youll be able to pay afterwards". obviously you wont go to that restaurant, but maybe thats the workplace restaurant (environment forces you to use it). that doesnt sound good, no? privacy laws must be enforced

rsolva 3y ago

Not a fundamental right, but a fundamental part of many peoples lives, at least here in Norway. Do you have children in school? Part of a local club? And so forth. In many situations, there are no alternatives if you want to participate in society. This is of course outrageous, but non the less a reality. I have managed to stay of Metas products since 2018, but I do not have children :)

vincnetas 3y ago

Idea is that facebook can give free access to its platform or they can choose to ask for payment, but they can not accept as a payment that users would wave their right to privacy. Privacy cant be for sale like you cant (legally) sell your kidney.

adhesive_wombat 3y ago
> you cant (legally) sell your kidney. If Milei gets his way, you can go to Argentina!

timterim 3y ago

GDPR does not allow discrimination against users who do not want to be tracked and you have the right not to be tracked. Wether the workaround ,that makes €10 then‘ is viable has not yet been tested in the courts. General assumption is that it is not. This would result in facebook to either allow non-sanctioned opt-out or pull out of the EU.

noirscape 3y ago

The main thing you're missing is that Facebook is the big corporation the GDPR was largely written to try and reign in AND that any judgement affecting Facebook is going to have downstream effects on other providers (there's been a few news sites trying the scheme in Europe too). This is gonna be the "do or die" for the pay-or-okay scheme. Given Facebook is doing it, I wouldn't put my chances on the "do" part; they are the extreme example and EU judges don't tend to look kindly on big corporations thinking they're capable of "outsmarting" their laws. Is right to privacy while using Facebook services a fundamental right? Well, given some of the services they own - maybe they should be. WhatsApp is massive in the EU, while Instagram seems to be the replacement for Twitter for a lot of people now that Twitter itself is flooded with fools that nobody likes to interact with. We've already had Facebook suprise drop a "EULA change" on WhatsApp users that let them use WA data in the Facebook algorithms. The specific field Facebook is even in makes it unusually hard to leave. It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it. So yes, privacy when using Facebook is extremely important (GDPR literally exists to codify privacy as a right) and pay-or-okay is holding it hostage.

robin_reala 3y ago
While I agree with you, it’s substantially different between countries. WhatsApp is pretty much unused in Sweden, while Facebook is basically a necessity.
generic92034 3y ago
I agree with the gist of your reply, but I object to this part: > It's somewhat socially acceptable to not have a Facebook account. Its less acceptable to not have an Instagram and I don't think you can function in west-european society without WhatsApp at the moment; basically everyone expects you to have it. I can assure you that it is perfectly viable to live a normal life in a west-european society without using any Meta product. It gets a bit more difficult if you have kids at school, though, with teachers and parents not being flexible.
- 3y ago