4 ms·

Why shouldn't you allowed to track people across your own services if users consent? If they don't consent, they are free to simply not use your services. Probl

Why shouldn't you allowed to track people across your own services if users consent? If they don't consent, they are free to simply not use your services. Problem solved. There is no actual need for this law. No rights are being infringed on. Just don't use the website.

stavros 1y ago
Because that's how we like it, and that's the end of it. The people of the EU have said that these are the rules for doing business there, and saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws" is rather irrelevant.
- pjc50 1y ago
  > saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws" The Americans call this "stand your ground".
  - stavros 1y ago
    Well, half "touché", half "precisely".
- xvector 1y ago
  Conversely, you can justify any authoritarian unjust law because "that's how we like it." "Deporting brown people without due process? That's how we like it, who are you to complain? You're free to not work with the US, but we know you will!" Obviously a nuanced and meaningful conversation goes much deeper than "that's how we like it." Why is it such an infringement on user rights to not be allowed to use a website if they don't follow the owner's terms of use? That is unaddressed.
  - _Algernon_ 1y ago
    Funny choice of example considering that it is the US that is currently deporting people without due process.
    - xvector 1y ago
      Yes, that is the precise example I used to demonstrate why "we like it that way" is not good policy. I don't get what's so funny.
nottorp 1y ago
> across your own services What are Facebook's own services? Or Google's for that matter. Neither tracks you just when you're on facebook.com or google.com. They track you everywhere.
Fraterkes 1y ago
Why doesnt this same logic apply to meta? They don't have to comply with this law if they don't want to, its their choice to operate in the EU
SSLy 1y ago
> Just don't use the website. https://www.newsweek.com/heres-how-turn-off-tracking-facebook-instagram-2016184 https://www.newsweek.com/heres-how-turn-off-tracking-faceboo... https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-stop-facebook-from-spying-on-your-internet-activity https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-stop-facebook-from-spyin... https://www.wired.com/story/ways-facebook-tracks-you-limit-it/ https://www.wired.com/story/ways-facebook-tracks-you-limit-i...
_Algernon_ 1y ago
This logic works just the same applied to Meta, without the requiring the expectation that Meta should be able to operate without following the law. Why shouldn't Meta be forbidden to track people? It's the law. If they don't want to follow the applicable law in the jurisdiction they operate in they can cease their operations there.

stavros 1y ago

Because that's how we like it, and that's the end of it. The people of the EU have said that these are the rules for doing business there, and saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws" is rather irrelevant.

pjc50 1y ago
> saying "I should be able to murder people in my own house, if you don't want to be murdered, just don't come here, there's no need for anti-murdering laws" The Americans call this "stand your ground".
- stavros 1y ago
  Well, half "touché", half "precisely".
xvector 1y ago
Conversely, you can justify any authoritarian unjust law because "that's how we like it." "Deporting brown people without due process? That's how we like it, who are you to complain? You're free to not work with the US, but we know you will!" Obviously a nuanced and meaningful conversation goes much deeper than "that's how we like it." Why is it such an infringement on user rights to not be allowed to use a website if they don't follow the owner's terms of use? That is unaddressed.
- _Algernon_ 1y ago
  Funny choice of example considering that it is the US that is currently deporting people without due process.
  - xvector 1y ago
    Yes, that is the precise example I used to demonstrate why "we like it that way" is not good policy. I don't get what's so funny.

nottorp 1y ago

> across your own services What are Facebook's own services? Or Google's for that matter. Neither tracks you just when you're on facebook.com or google.com. They track you everywhere.

Fraterkes 1y ago

Why doesnt this same logic apply to meta? They don't have to comply with this law if they don't want to, its their choice to operate in the EU

SSLy 1y ago

> Just don't use the website. https://www.newsweek.com/heres-how-turn-off-tracking-facebook-instagram-2016184 https://www.newsweek.com/heres-how-turn-off-tracking-faceboo... https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-stop-facebook-from-spying-on-your-internet-activity https://www.pcmag.com/how-to/how-to-stop-facebook-from-spyin... https://www.wired.com/story/ways-facebook-tracks-you-limit-it/ https://www.wired.com/story/ways-facebook-tracks-you-limit-i...

_Algernon_ 1y ago

This logic works just the same applied to Meta, without the requiring the expectation that Meta should be able to operate without following the law. Why shouldn't Meta be forbidden to track people? It's the law. If they don't want to follow the applicable law in the jurisdiction they operate in they can cease their operations there.