The do charge €10/mo like every other company does, and they add the possibility to not pay and rather see targeted advertisement. How is that worse?
Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy
TheEntity@lemmy.world 7 months agoThey can just charge €10/mo like every other company does, for example Netflix. They can’t offer it as an alternative to the “freely given consent”. It’s not freely given if the alternative is to pay to not give this consent.
bleistift2@feddit.de 7 months ago
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 7 months ago
You’re free to not use Facebook.
Also, your argument breaks down because there are plenty of free streaming platforms that use targeted advertising as payment for their services.
If anything, Facebook doing this is surprising because they’re making data collection opt-in.
ZeDoTelhado@lemmy.world 7 months ago
The biggest problem with this approach is basically Facebook saying that you have to pay for a right, meaning, if the law tells you that you can, and should, always have a say if you are followed around or not, you mist have that capability. What Facebook is doing is put a right behind a paywall, which is absurd
bleistift2@feddit.de 7 months ago
If I understand you correctly, you’re making the same argument as !snooggums@midwest.social above, so I’ll copy answer to them here:
That is a completely different issue. On the one hand, meta does collect data on people who do not have an account. This is simply illegal, since that collection is neither necessary nor consented to. The EU should finally put a stop to that.
On the other hand we have the voluntary relationship a user enters with facebook by creating an account. This is what the article is about and what I was referring to in my comment – the “binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising”
humorlessrepost@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Are there any rights you think should supersede contracts?
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 7 months ago
This is just about paying to not have ads, not about data collection.
TheEntity@lemmy.world 7 months ago
Firstly, this is not “my argument”, this is EU’s argument.
Secondly, none of these platforms present it as a choice between paying and giving the kind of consent that by law needs to be optional and freely given.
Thirdly, being free to not use a service that is breaking the law does not make it any less illegal.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
not really, its so ubiquitous some of their services cant be not used.
its impossible to exist in my country without whatsapp, most businesses do their customer service through whatsapp now.
lemmyreader@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
My goodness. That is incredibly sad :(
0x0@programming.dev 6 months ago
No, it’s not. It’s just less convenient.
yetAnotherUser@feddit.de 6 months ago
That’s like saying the US has functional public transit, it’s just less convenient.
umbrella@lemmy.ml 6 months ago
hahah i wish
BolexForSoup@kbin.social 7 months ago
You’re free to not own or use a car. Should we have no rights when it comes to cars as well?
bleistift2@feddit.de 7 months ago
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.
BolexForSoup@kbin.social 7 months ago
They can’t assign any concessions they wants that’s the entire point.
0x0@programming.dev 6 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.
pearsaltchocolatebar@discuss.online 7 months ago
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.
BolexForSoup@kbin.social 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.
garrett@infosec.pub 7 months ago
But there’s also no ad-supported cars.
DrWeevilJammer@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
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.
Source
BolexForSoup@kbin.social 7 months ago
What does the monetization scheme have to do with it?
520@kbin.social 6 months ago
Yet.