GDPR! GDPR! GDPR! :)

Fucking ridiculous. So now allowing people to consent and use your product after consenting is not enough? You also have to allow them to dictate how you monetize, and if they don’t like the monetization method of your business, they can request a new one? Hopefully this “privacy group” is just a minority money grabbing org, since if this is the status quo then GDPR is doomed.

@dfox might be you are right. Though, I Read in other news where they mentioned that for business it's an obstacle. And if we consider about current data protection issues then I think some steps should be happened otherwise ...

@dfox This guy has actually won one or more lawsuits against Facebook over tracking non Facebook users (through those pesky like/share buttons on websites) and he's starting something again for the Cambridge analytica scandal.

@linuxxx but he surely had this lawsuit/complaint ready to go for May 25 at 12:00am. Not like it was organic from FB non-compliance or anything.

Also, while I agree about non-users, that’s not at all what this complaint is about. This is literally “people who want to use Facebook shouldn’t have to allow Facebook to monetize their data.” Sorry, that’s not fair. Facebook is a free service, and you can either consent or not use it and have them delete your data like they should.

No one has a right to use every social network under any conditions they see fit. If you don’t like what a company asks of you to use their free non-essential service, why not just not use it?

And I’m not saying I agree with Facebook or even like them. I don’t. But I hate government ridiculousness more and I hate nanny-laws.

FB is a pretty shitty service. Why do people who don’t like their data policies insist on using it? FB should be able to serve whoever they want.

@dfox Fully agree on that one with you.

Although I deeply hate Facebook, using it and then complaining that you're being tracked is like forbidding a bakery to use water for their products - there goes their business model.

But, as for the tracking-thingies-outside-facebook part, I fully agree with Schrems.

@linuxxx yup, exactly, and that’s a good analogy. They shouldn’t have to offer a “middle ground” like the claim says. FB is actively saying, “we don’t care about privacy conscious users and we are going to use your data if you sign up for our service” - many will disagree with their decision there, but they should be allowed to cater to that market if they want. It’s their business.

And yeah, definitely agree on the users who didn’t sign up and didn’t offer any consent. They shouldn’t be doing that.

@dfox Gotta say, one of the things I love about the GDPR (it's called AVG over here by the way, in the beginning I genuinely thought people were talking about the antivirus software) is that companies are required to make their privacy policies and ToS's humanly readable/understandable.

Imo then you're at least giving the users a chance to not use the service if they're not okay with the way it handles user data.

@linuxxx I definitely think that’s a good thing, but I would argue a very, very tiny percentage of users will ever read a TOS/Privacy policy either way. I think we care more than the masses. Most casual users probably will never pay attention to TOS, they just want to get through signup and use whatever shiny thing they signed up for haha. Unfortunate, but maybe people will start to become more aware.