Facebook Starts Its Facial Recognition Push To Europeans (techcrunch.com) 42
An anonymous reader quotes a report from TechCrunch: Jimmy Nsubuga, a journalist at Metro, is among several European Facebook users who have reported getting notifications asking if they want to turn on face recognition technology. Facebook has previously said an opt-in option would be pushed out to all European users, and also globally, as part of changes to its T&Cs and consent flow. In Europe, the company is hoping to convince users to voluntarily allow it to deploy the privacy-hostile tech -- which was turned off in the bloc after regulatory pressure, back in 2012, when Facebook began using facial recognition to offer features such as automatically tagging users in photo uploads. But under impending changes to its T&Cs -- ostensibly to comply with the EU's incoming GDPR data protection standard -- the company has crafted a manipulative consent flow that tries to sell people on giving it their data; including filling in its own facial recognition blanks by convincing Europeans to agree to it grabbing and using their biometric data after all. Users who choose not to switch on facial recognition still have to click through a "continue" screen before they get to the off switch. On this screen Facebook attempts to convince them to turn it on -- using manipulative examples of how the tech can "protect" them.
If an non-EU resident claims to reside in the EU.. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
I can't think of any even vaguely tenuous reason why it would.
However, you might be able to trick Facebook into giving you EU-resident treatment anyway.
Re: (Score:2)
And what if you are an EU citizen living in the US?
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So Facepalm is entitled to half lie to you, and sell half your personal data - the half that is most valuable to them.
However, you have the right to carry a half-concealed weapon and shoot Facepalm CxOs half-dead.
Re: (Score:2)
EU law most of the time is only valid in the EU.
Every human being is under jurisdiction of the laws at the place he/she resides.
Unless it is an US law, ofc. which claim to be valid world wide.
AND: unless there are special laws e.g. like some EU or Scandinavian countries have against child abuse or child/minor prostitution where you can get prosecuted in your home country if you committed a crime in a foreign country (by definition of your home country).
Anyway, the EU does not claim their laws are valid all
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
The GDPR is only relevant in the EU for citizens, residents and companies doing business in the EU.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
And how would that work?
Or did you somehow mistype?
Obviously it is valid for every european company.
Does not matter if it does business with non eu companies or not.
If I have an account on a web site in 'Oceania' ... EU laws don't apply. We are not idiots.
Re: (Score:2)
If I have an account on a web site in 'Oceania' ... EU laws don't apply. We are not idiots.
Actually under GDPR EU law does apply, at least according to the EU. How will it work? no idea, that is one of the big discussion points in GDPR as realistically they have no means of enforcement outside of the EU, nor means of investigation etc.
Re: (Score:2)
And how would that be the case?
If a company does not offer services in the EU via an EU branch there is no way to enforce such a law.
Sigh (Score:2)
URL slug is /2018/04/20/just-say-no/ (Score:2)
I think TechCrunch is trying to tell us something.
Re: (Score:2)
Listen, using double negatives don't or rather does not make for proper English.
/. editor.
Not that you're vying for the position of next
But back to topic: I would like Europe to be the last untouched frontier. Let the Zuckman have the colonies. In other words, here across the pond, his fellow 'muricans are his petri dish.
Like it or Not! (Score:4, Insightful)
It will make no difference to China, the NSA, Thiel & Russia.
They all want total knowledge for total control ... if and when needed to end dissent.
Europeans need to start their own push, (Score:3)
... to delete Facebook. FB needs to die, to make room for social media that serves the interests of its users, rather than serving advertisers, companies like Cambridge Analytica, and other such vile putrid scum. Facebook needs to die fast and hard, to discourage investors from betting their money on business models that that rely on abusing their fellow citizens.
Re: (Score:1)
How does a company run serving the interest of users without a paid subscription? At some point, the cost of hardware, software, up keep, marketing, etc will draw you to advertise, and once you do, it is a slippery slope.
I ask for sake of learning.
However, do not give me idealogical answers. Give me practical ones that can actually be implemented.
Kill Facebook, jail Zuckerberg (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
No, regulate them! Alternative is - RÉN R (Score:1)
There is world-wide competition to be the social network of the planet. Chinese or Russian platforms will take over the void immediately if Facebook is killed. No, let's find another solution.
Re:No, regulate them! Alternative is - RÉN R (Score:2)
Another reason to (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
You can disable to be tagged in images since ... since ever more or less.
Does facebook ask ... (Score:5, Insightful)
their user, when seeking permission for face recognition, if they have asked all their friends if they are OK with facebook to recognising their faces ? I doubt it. So using the agreement of one facebook user facebook will work on the faces of many who have not agreed - and might not be aware that this is happening.
Re: (Score:2)
No you don't understand the point. Facial recognition still happens, the point here is that Facebook doesn't auto-tag or suggest who the person may be.
escort related (Score:1)