this post was submitted on 18 Apr 2024
424 points (100.0% liked)

Privacy Guides

16814 readers
8 users here now

In the digital age, protecting your personal information might seem like an impossible task. We’re here to help.

This is a community for sharing news about privacy, posting information about cool privacy tools and services, and getting advice about your privacy journey.


You can subscribe to this community from any Kbin or Lemmy instance:

Learn more...


Check out our website at privacyguides.org before asking your questions here. We've tried answering the common questions and recommendations there!

Want to get involved? The website is open-source on GitHub, and your help would be appreciated!


This community is the "official" Privacy Guides community on Lemmy, which can be verified here. Other "Privacy Guides" communities on other Lemmy servers are not moderated by this team or associated with the website.


Moderation Rules:

  1. We prefer posting about open-source software whenever possible.
  2. This is not the place for self-promotion if you are not listed on privacyguides.org. If you want to be listed, make a suggestion on our forum first.
  3. No soliciting engagement: Don't ask for upvotes, follows, etc.
  4. Surveys, Fundraising, and Petitions must be pre-approved by the mod team.
  5. Be civil, no violence, hate speech. Assume people here are posting in good faith.
  6. Don't repost topics which have already been covered here.
  7. News posts must be related to privacy and security, and your post title must match the article headline exactly. Do not editorialize titles, you can post your opinions in the post body or a comment.
  8. Memes/images/video posts that could be summarized as text explanations should not be posted. Infographics and conference talks from reputable sources are acceptable.
  9. No help vampires: This is not a tech support subreddit, don't abuse our community's willingness to help. Questions related to privacy, security or privacy/security related software and their configurations are acceptable.
  10. No misinformation: Extraordinary claims must be matched with evidence.
  11. Do not post about VPNs or cryptocurrencies which are not listed on privacyguides.org. See Rule 2 for info on adding new recommendations to the website.
  12. General guides or software lists are not permitted. Original sources and research about specific topics are allowed as long as they are high quality and factual. We are not providing a platform for poorly-vetted, out-of-date or conflicting recommendations.

Additional Resources:

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

The EU's Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising.

In October last year, the social media giant said it would be possible to pay Meta to stop Instagram or Facebook feeds of personalized ads and prevent it from using personal data for marketing for users in the EU, EEA, or Switzerland. Meta then announced a subscription model of €9.99/month on the web or €12.99/month on iOS and Android for users who did not want their personal data used for targeted advertising.

At the time, Felix Mikolasch, data protection lawyer at noyb, said: "EU law requires that consent is the genuine free will of the user. Contrary to this law, Meta charges a 'privacy fee' of up to €250 per year if anyone dares to exercise their fundamental right to data protection."

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 12 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (3 children)

You’re free to not own or use a car. Should we have no rights when it comes to cars as well?

You’re free to not use the internet. Should we have no rights online?

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (3 children)

But there’s also no ad-supported cars.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Not seeing ads for GEICO on your car's dashboard doesn't mean that Toyota isn't gathering as much data as they can about you via the platform they built and then selling that information to GEICO.

As well as information about who you are, Toyota can also collect your “driving behavior.” This includes information such as your “acceleration and speed, steering, and braking functionality, and travel direction.” It may also gather your in-vehicle preferences, favorite locations saved on its systems, and images gathered by external cameras or sensors.

Some models of Toyota can also scan your face for face recognition when you enter one of its vehicles.

Source

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

And that is totally unreasonable collection, of course. It’s also completely incomparable to pretending that Facebook is as necessary as a car (at least in America).

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

If your bar is “we only have rights when it comes to things that we can’t live without“ then not only are you creating your own arbitrary standards that is not reflected in our society, but you should be angry if you think that’s how things work.

You have rights dude. Stop trying to win an online argument/defending business in such a bizarre way. There are limits to what they can do whether they re essential services or not.

Besides, you have kind of lost the thread here. It’s not about whether or not they can advertise or charge. It’s about how they collect and use your data in service of advertising (and more). It’s in the first sentence of the article.

The EU's Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising.

Facebook is free to have an ad tier and a pay tier. It’s about the data they collect and how it’s used.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

What does the monetization scheme have to do with whether or not we have consumer and privacy rights beyond how it infringes on them?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

The point was that it’s apples to oranges. Monetization is kinda the key issue here unless you’re ready to declare Facebook a utility and publicly fund it. Personally, I’d rather we be rid of it entirely.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

beyond how it infringes on them

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Of course ad-supported services are infringing on your privacy in a way but if you’re not ready to call Facebook a publicly-funded utility, it’s childish to act like it’s so essential that it should be entirely ad-free with no paid tier.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

You are presenting a false dichotomy and ads do not have to infringe on your privacy to the degree Facebook does it. There are gradients.

You’re reducing these arguments so much they’re losing the nuance that warrants the entire discussion. You’re also calling me childish to boot, which doesn’t give me much hope for the rest of this conversation

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That is a valid, nuanced take that this article and (seemingly) the legislation don’t get into.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

The first sentence of the article establishes my argument

The EU’s Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising.

It’s the means of creating their targeted advertising that is in question. Not the act of advertising itself.

You’re arguing as if it says “The EU’s Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and having ads.” I encourage you to read the article If you haven’t already

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago (1 children)

Only cause they can’t interject ads while driving lol

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago

They'll try, I'm sure. Tesla and law abiding don't go well together.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (1 children)

What right is being infringed upon? Facebook is saying your options to use a private service are to pay for it, or receive targeted advertising.

You're free to just not use any meta products like I do.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 6 months ago* (last edited 6 months ago)

It’s not about the advertising. It’s that you have to pay money to opt out of their aggressive data collection. The advertising is just one thing they do with your data.

The EU's Data Protection Board (EDPB) has told large online platforms they should not offer users a binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising.

It’s the first sentence of the article.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago (2 children)

You have the right to not own a car. But if you do, you must have insurance for it (in Germany, at least). You cannot hide behind GDPR and say “I have a right to my data. I must not be asked to give it to any insurer without my consent.” You also need to have a driver’s license with your name and photo on it. GDPR doesn’t protect you there, either.

The bottom line is: Using a product may come with responsibilities or other concessions. You have the right to not use the product if the concessions aren’t worth it to you. You do not have the right to any product if you refuse the obligations that come with it.

This is, of course, my own opinion based on my understanding of how the world should work.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago) (1 children)

They can’t assign any concessions they wants that’s the entire point. You have rights you can’t sign away even if you want to. I mean dude you’re defending facebook, arguably the single worst company when it comes to respecting user data and privacy. Your assumption should be they are probably wrong until proven otherwise.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 7 months ago (1 children)

I mean dude you’re defending Meta, arguably the single worst company when it comes to respecting user data and privacy

That’s argumentum ad hominem. If the law means what you think it means, it applies whether we’re talking about EvilCorp or SaveTheWhaleChildrenBeeFluff.

Also recall the very first thing I said on this topic:

I’m all for GDPR and really enjoy its protections, but I don’t understand this one.

I’m playing devil’s advocate in order to gain insight, because I have no clue how this board reaches its conclusions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago* (last edited 7 months ago)

I’m playing Devil’s advocate

Don’t it’s obnoxious and not insightful. It’s how teens test drive arguments without repercussions.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 7 months ago

Oh, by the way... you have all those rights, but from now on you can only have them if you pay 10$/mo, otherwise we'll take it upon ourselves to switching on all telemetry and cameras in your car and pass that data on to insurers and others.

Actually... it doesn't even qualify as analogy, more like premonition.