5 ms·

> Where is the line between optimizing an ad pipeline and violating privacy? Right at the start. Of course, the allegation was that Facebook broke privacy law

> Where is the line between optimizing an ad pipeline and violating privacy? Right at the start. Of course, the allegation was that Facebook broke privacy laws, and not just that they violated people's privacy, so your response is a total non sequitur: you're talking about how it's good business to violate privacy, which doesn't address at all whether it's good business to break the law, nor whether these laws draw a meaningful boundary. Unless you meant that anything which is in the business' interest to do shouldn't be illegal for it...?

sillysaurus3 12y ago
Comments like these make HN not very fun anymore. Unless you meant that anything which is in the business' interest to do shouldn't be illegal for it...? It's tempting to leave a sarcastic reply. Just because a lawsuit has been filed doesn't mean any law has been broken. Would you cite which EU privacy law Facebook broke, and how they broke it? The article lists the central claims of the lawsuit, which don't seem to reference any particular law. They also seem to be arguing from moral grounds rather than strictly legal grounds. That's why I said they don't seem compelling. And then I get accused of being both a bad commenter (my response is a "non sequitur"?) and claiming that businesses should violate privacy (when in fact I asked where is the line between a privacy violation and a legitimate business practice). Classy.
- DanBC 12y ago
  > Would you cite which EU privacy law Facebook broke, and how they broke it? Simplistically: The EU Privacy Directive; and it was broken by keeping data for too long and doing stuff that they didn't have user permission for. More complicatedly: What ever country the lawsuit is taking place in will have implemented the EU Privacy directive, and so that country's law is the actual law that's been broken. And also more complicatedly: Just having permission via checkbox might not be enough; the EU strongly prefers "privacy by default" where the user has to specifically check a box to lose that bit of privacy. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID=PDyNTjhbnGTWSNnJ5wGmVr01nvygLty2bt7kV721yqrRdHHqzLRv!183635007?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID... Factsheet: EU Privacy Directive and Social Networks http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/factsheets/3_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2...

sillysaurus3 12y ago

Comments like these make HN not very fun anymore. Unless you meant that anything which is in the business' interest to do shouldn't be illegal for it...? It's tempting to leave a sarcastic reply. Just because a lawsuit has been filed doesn't mean any law has been broken. Would you cite which EU privacy law Facebook broke, and how they broke it? The article lists the central claims of the lawsuit, which don't seem to reference any particular law. They also seem to be arguing from moral grounds rather than strictly legal grounds. That's why I said they don't seem compelling. And then I get accused of being both a bad commenter (my response is a "non sequitur"?) and claiming that businesses should violate privacy (when in fact I asked where is the line between a privacy violation and a legitimate business practice). Classy.

DanBC 12y ago
> Would you cite which EU privacy law Facebook broke, and how they broke it? Simplistically: The EU Privacy Directive; and it was broken by keeping data for too long and doing stuff that they didn't have user permission for. More complicatedly: What ever country the lawsuit is taking place in will have implemented the EU Privacy directive, and so that country's law is the actual law that's been broken. And also more complicatedly: Just having permission via checkbox might not be enough; the EU strongly prefers "privacy by default" where the user has to specifically check a box to lose that bit of privacy. Directive 95/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 October 1995 on the protection of individuals with regard to the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID=PDyNTjhbnGTWSNnJ5wGmVr01nvygLty2bt7kV721yqrRdHHqzLRv!183635007?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/ALL/;ELX_SESSIONID... Factsheet: EU Privacy Directive and Social Networks http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2012/factsheets/3_en.pdf http://ec.europa.eu/justice/data-protection/document/review2...