Slashdot Mirror
Unearthed Emails Show Google, Ad Giants Know They Break Privacy Laws (theregister.co.uk)
AmiMoJo shares a report from The Register: Privacy warriors have filed fresh evidence in their ongoing battle against real-time web ad exchange systems, which campaigners claim trample over Europe's data protection laws. The new filings -- submitted today to regulators in the UK, Ireland, and Poland -- allege that Google and industry body the Interactive Advertising Bureau (IAB) are well aware that their advertising networks flout the EU's privacy-safeguarding GDPR, and yet are doing nothing about it. The IAB, Google -- which is an IAB member -- and others in the ad-slinging world insist they aren't doing anything wrong. The fresh submissions come soon after the UK Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) revealed plans to probe programmatic ads. These are adverts that are selected and served on-the-fly as you visit a webpage, using whatever personal information has been scraped together about you to pick an ad most relevant to your interests. [...] The ICO's investigation will focus on how well informed people are about how their personal information is used for this kind of online advertising, which laws ad-technology firms rely on for processing said private data, and whether users' data is secure as it is shared on these platforms.
Google was founded on the principle of "Don't be Evil". So I sincerely doubt they would do this even in exchange for tens of billions of dollars.
never go full creepy-tard
Hard time in prison.
We all know it.
And yet they continue to violate the GPDR and the Canadian Constitutional Right of Privacy.
Because you won't jail them.
Fines won't work.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
The technology and the way it works, exchanging privacy for free services, came first.
The law come very recently.
I guess if the law is fully implemented, it will kill the "you are the product" free internet services business model.
Where are we going and why are we in a handbasket?
...and they can't do that without breaking privacy laws.
Does anyone think that governments are going to allow their skirting of laws to prevent them from spying on their own citizens to be closed by stopping big data to from doing the data collection for them?
I have two HP Z840's workstations the BIOS is spyware and the BIOS can be updated in BIOS and HP can make a direct connection through the BIOS to "diagnostic the hardware and add-ons." The Intel and the AMD processors have known backdoors that even Google are trying to disable.
Every USB plugged into a Windows system sends data to Microsoft and you can monitor that data leaving your computer using a two-way firewall.
Any hardware that comes out of the U.S. cannot be trusted.
There are a lot of megalomaniacs on the Internet. The banks want to introduce a anti-keylogger that anybody who uses online banking must use before they are allowed to use that bank and its online banking. The product is a data collecting product to monitor all the websites you go to to calculate your risk.
...for one of the only companies that obeyed 'do-not-track', for the record. One of the biggest hassles with these privacy laws is that, even if you don't track market segments for a user, even if you don't track any personal data - you at least need to match unique user IDs to what ads you've already shown them. When Proctor & Gamble comes to you and says "we'll pay $0.01 for you to play this paper towel roll ad, but ONLY three times to each person per week"... well uh. I just don't know how you would do that under the GDPR.
So stop using those creepy "services." Use protonmail instead of gmail, searx.me instead of google.com, Brave instead of Chrome, etc etc...
The bigger problem, in my opinion, is the gov't is so damned creepy. I can opt out of Google's creepiness, but there is no option for opting out of IRS, NSA, CIA, TSA, FBI, Homeland Security, Code Compliance, IME, etc etc.
They only ever show me things I have bought or have considered and rejected. Things like DocuSign, PeoplePerHour, and so on. And I found these by using search engines to research for what I was looking for.
So, it is, where I am targetted, a complete waste of money.
tax on innovative US brands.
What is the EU nations need for all the tax extraction for US brands, services and products?
The EU nations populations had the free ability to select products and found what the US private sector offered was great.
Generation of people in the EU had the ability to back early French, German and UK computer products.
People all over the EU went with price, quality and freedom of US products and services.
Now the EU nations gov respond to US innovation with tax and bureaucracy.
EU nation brands had their time in the 1970's and into the 1990's to show their skill, design ability and cost of production.
The "internet' was equal before all nations. EU nations and EU brands again could have embraced the new internet and become top providers of service and products.
People given the freedom to select emerging brands went with the price, quality, freedom and innovation the US offered.
More tax and gov policy will not create good quality EU nation brands.
Paying new EU taxes and understanding new EU regulations will create legal and compliance jobs.
Thats not going to add to the ability of a brand to be productive. Just more costs and more gov oversight.
Let EU brands be as free as US brands and try to sell their ideas.
More EU tax and EU gov control is not advancing creative innovation.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Definitely!
GDPR was passed for a while and the general legal consensus was that it didn't apply to ads (IANAL, but I was told this by one). Then 3 months before the enforcement date the EU issued a clarification that it does affect advertising. All the big advertisers scramble to put together a compliant implementation, but with 3 months to work with they mostly just hack stuff together out of existing projects.
Enforcement date rolls around, none of the publishers care about compliance so they refuse to use the hacked together clumps of junk that they would need in order to be compliant. The big as networks have to choose between losing ALL of their customers and violating a strict interpretation of GDPR. Guess who the EU goes after?
The GDPR is an unreasonable demand that can't be effectively applied to those outside its jurisdictional boundaries no matter what a European court rules. A judgment in Europe by a European court won't get enforced overseas either unless there is an equivalent law and agreement. Europe politicians are acting like ass holes thinking that they have the right to control companies beyond there boarders.
The idea that the GDPR is going to magically fix the privacy problem is ridicules, ignores the nature of the internet, and puts an unfair burden on the rest of us too small to be able to reasonably comply. Small companies inside and outside of Europe shouldn't be burdened with complying with hundreds (and really thousands) of different laws from around the world by mere inference that something is compatible with a power system in a particular region or country. Or because something is priced in Euros/dollars/or some other currency. Should Europeans be bound by US law because people in the US can select the dollar? These are factors that determine whether or not the European government will attempt to enforce its laws against foreign entities.
Just because you have European countries listed under countries for shipping options under checkout could make you [in the eyes of the European authorities as the law is written] subject to the GDPR. Just because a company isn't asking you whether or not its OK to use cookies does not mean they are violating your privacy, but it does mean your likely violating absurd European laws (not talking about the GDPR specifically here).
Having taken a trip to Europe two weeks ago I experienced first hand the impact of direct and indirect censorship that has come about from these ridicules laws. There were certain news sites I could not access. There were certain streaming sites I could not access. This has resulted in many smaller web sites rejecting Europeans and others are clearly ignoring the European law. Yet at least really stupid Europeans are under the impression that the privacy problem is fixed because they passed some law. There are going to be malicious sites which don't comply with this law outside of the Europe's jurisdiction no matter what dumb burdensome laws European's pass. But it's mostly just negatively impacting Europeans by reducing the products they can buy or receive in a timely or cost effective manor and the sites they can access.
This sort of behavior is little different than the US governments in persecuting people who do not live and have often never been to its jurisdiction. This needs to end. If you don't like Google or Facebook or whoever (and I don't) don't use products and services from them (I don't). Supporting your government's use of violence, theft, and fraud to get your way is childish. There are solutions- but this isn't the answer.
Authoritarian, corrupt corporation meets authoritarian, corrupt government. Hilarity ensues.
You dumb fat cunt.
Sorry folks, but I've got to...
DUH!
Really? I've never seen any since the mid-1990's when it very briefly and annoyingly appeared. Then it disappeared. Completely. And the same with "tracking".
Not that they are knowingly doing criminal things, that is a given. But that they are so stupid as to put their crimes in writing...
Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
Once you understand that the law is applicapable to corporations, that have or will have business in Europe, you'll understand what you are saying is rubish.
Obviously a small online shop in USA will not care about GDPR, EU can't do shit about it, but if they ever plan to have business located in Europe, European servers and what not, they are going to have to obey the law or pay fines.
GDPR is a good thing and the intentions are good. Just because it doesn't magically fix everything, doesn't mean it needs to be removed. Please, give us ANY example of a magic law, that actually fixes everything immediately. Right, there isn't one, and by your logic, there should be no laws.
Professional liars being caught lying on the job! News at 11!
That's all this is. And it's clear where it comes from.
I'm not saying it should not be told. It should be repeated on every site and every billboard until advertisement becomes illegal like it should.
Instead there should be a decentralized public database of all products and their properties [using SI units as values and standardized reproducible measuring methods requiring a minimum of statistical significance], so everyone can find the product that suits him best. No "emotions", no cheery faces and dazzling blingy design displays, no pschological trickery, no " marketing"!)
Looks like they use the same broken algorithm. Which means this goes way deeper than I thought, and is systemic.
So stop using those creepy "services."
The problem, when non-tech, non-/. people try to stop using creepy services, is that you end up with that :
We here around just have no clue how much "normal" people have been becoming dependent on "those creepy service", and are completely oblivious to even the possibility of not relying on a 3rd party.
(e.g.: The first reflex of my s.o. for extremely simple task (make a collage of picture to build a banner) is to *google* around, find a *web app* and upload her pictures to that. I would just fire up any software enabling me to place picture on a field. Be it something dedicated like GIMP or Inkscape, or repurposing something simple like LibreOffice Impress)
The Gizmodo "I shut down the big five" piece above is very telling once you look at the journalist's complete inability to send a big file over the internet. She's completely at lost because she's cut off dropbox and google drive and completely panics. Whereas it's something that I - like anyone else - regularly do (using a mix of SFTP/RSYNC, FTP/S and/or HTTP, between machine I own like servers and/or raspberries plugged at home and/or servers I rent at a local datacenter business).
At that point I wouldn't have been surprise (and was almost expecting) if I had read a couple of paragraphs later that she'd been unable to cook her own dinner because she completely at loss about how to operate a modern IoT-enabled stove without blurting commands to Alexa/Siri/Cortana/OkayGoogle/whatever...
We have the automatic reflex of using our solution and not trust "somebody else's cloud" for anything, because back when we began as kids, there wasn't even a cloud to begin with.
So for us it's completely trivial to think "Why should I use service X, Y or Z if I'm creeped out by the company running it ?"
Whereas most of the society needs to completely rethink how they interact with technology.
Use protonmail instead of gmail, searx.me instead of google.com, Brave instead of Chrome, etc etc...
Again, we have a completely different approach to things, we don't have that many marbles stored at someone else's computer.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
1. Sanhedrin 59a: "Murdering Goyim (non-jew) is like killing a wild animal."
2. Abodah Zara 26b: "Even the best of the Gentiles (non-jew) should be killed."
3. Sanhedrin 59a: "A goy (Gentile) who pries into The Law (Talmud) is guilty of death."
4. Yebhamoth 11b: "Sexual intercourse with a little girl is permitted if she is three years of age."
5. Schabouth Hag. 6d: "Jews may swear falsely by use of subterfuge wording."
6. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Do not save Goyim in danger of death."
7. Hilkkoth Akum X1: "Show no mercy to the Goyim."
8. Choschen Hamm 388, 15: "If it can be proven that someone has given the money of Israelites to the Goyim, a way must be found after prudent consideration to wipe him off the face of the earth."
9. Choschen Hamm 266,1: "A Jew may keep anything he finds which belongs to the Akum (Gentile). For he who returns lost property (to Gentiles) sins against the Law by increasing the power of the transgressors of the Law. It is praiseworthy, however, to return lost property if it is done to honor the name of God, namely, if by so doing, Christians will praise the Jews and look upon them as honorable people."
10. Szaaloth-Utszabot, The Book of Jore Dia 17: "A Jew should and must make a false oath when the Goyim asks if our books contain anything against them."
11. Baba Necia 114, 6: "The Jews are human beings, but the nations of the world are not human beings but beasts."
12. Simeon Haddarsen, fol. 56-D: "When the Messiah comes every Jew will have 2800 slaves."
13. Nidrasch Talpioth, p. 225-L: "Jehovah created the non-Jew in human form so that the Jew would not have to be served by beasts. The non-Jew is consequently an animal in human form, and condemned to serve the Jew day and night."
14. Aboda Sarah 37a: "A Gentile girl who is three years old can be violated."
15. Gad. Shas. 2:2: "A Jew may violate but not marry a non-Jewish girl."
16. Tosefta. Aboda Zara B, 5: "If a goy kills a goy or a Jew, he is responsible; but if a Jew kills a goy, he is NOT responsible."
17. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 388: "It is permitted to kill a Jewish denunciator everywhere. It is permitted to kill him even before he denounces."
18. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 348: "All property of other nations belongs to the Jewish nation, which, consequently, is entitled to seize upon it without any scruples."
19. Tosefta, Abda Zara VIII, 5: "How to interpret the word 'robbery.' A goy is forbidden to steal, rob, or take women slaves, etc., from a goy or from a Jew. But a Jew is NOT forbidden to do all this to a goy."
20. Seph. Jp., 92, 1: "God has given the Jews power over the possessions and blood of all nations."
21. Schulchan Aruch, Choszen Hamiszpat 156: "When a Jew has a Gentile in his clutches, another Jew may go to the same Gentile, lend him money and in turn deceive him, so that the Gentile shall be ruined. For the property of a Gentile, according to our law, belongs to no one, and the first Jew that passes has full right to seize it."
22. Schulchan Aruch, Johre Deah, 122: "A Jew is forbidden to drink from a glass of wine which a Gentile has touched, because the touch has made the wine unclean."
23. Nedarim 23b: "He who desires that none of his vows made during the year be valid, let him stand at the beginning of the year and declare, 'Every vow which I may make in the future shall be null'. His vows are then invalid."
Jews view of non-jews (goy/goyim/gentiles) are above.
ALL from their "book of law" the talmud.
Jews claim anti-semitism when they are proven racists themselves from their own book of cultural laws the talmud shown in part above.
Try "jew guilt" us?
There's plenty in that link to their talmud cultural laws and their history to be guilty of.
SO FUCK OFF JEWS!