back to article Super Cali's frickin' whiz kids no longer oppose us: Even though Facebook thought info law was quite atrocious

One day after Lt Commander (All Your) Data Mark Zuckerberg was lightly sautéed by US Congress over Facebook's fast and loose relationship with user privacy, the Silicon Valley giant has dropped its opposition to a proposed California data protection law. The California Consumer Privacy Act is a ballot proposition that will be …

  1. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    'harder for lobbyists to kill off new laws in states where they have special access to politicians'.

    Kudos to Cali... But I've a question: in social-media / digital-land, how is it decided where someone actually lives? Especially in a huge country with no borders. Can we all be Calians: I'm Sparticus, yes I'm Sparticus too etc.

    In short, how will this be enforced?

    Must we send in 2 forms of juicy ID address data to be slurped?

    I have the same question about GDPR. No one seems to know, definitely not the complicit Irish-OPDC. What designates GDPR protection / How do you show you're European... The country you unopened your account or where you live now? What happens if you have to travel overseas for work?

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      C'mon, they know so much about you and not where you're living??

      Jokes aside, it's a company onus to ensure they don't break the law - so they'll have to ask *before* where are you from, and be careful when they don't know.

    2. The Man Who Fell To Earth Silver badge
      FAIL

      Surveillance Capitalism

      There's no amount of lipstick you can put on the pig of Surveillance Capitalism that's going to make me want to kiss it.

      1. bombastic bob Silver badge
        Devil

        Re: Surveillance Capitalism

        especially when NOT on the oinky end? [someone else on El Reg said something like it before me, so credit where due]

    3. bombastic bob Silver badge
      Unhappy

      Re: 'harder for lobbyists to kill off new laws (etc. title too long)'.

      just to point out, if this is a ballot initiative, those kinds of things don't need to involve politicians. In fact, they can be used to STOP politicians [since vote fraud seems to keep them in office, the only plausible explanation at any rate]. There's currently one in the works to REPEAL a ginormous gasoline tax increase, for example (because NO crooked politician EVER dislikes a tax increase, especially if it increases THEIR power and control over citizens' lives, "for the children" or roads or whatever, it always gets diverted into their pet projects and buying votes, and then they *BEG* for *MORE* and do it *AGAIN*).

      On the other hand, these ballot initiatives are sometimes often de-railed by the courts [which are also pwned by the 'political class'].

      And as such I'd expect any ballot initiative that attempts to empower the people to first be EMASCULATED, then MADE IRRELEVANT, by 'twisty' legal action combined with political lobbying and corruption in general.

      Cali-Fornicate-You's state legislature has been called one of *THE* most corrupt institutions in the world, with lobbyists on the floor at all times, regularly consulted on EVERY piece of legislation before any vote. Cali-Fornicate-You legislators are therefore some of the WORST crooked politicians on the planet, the best that lobbyist money can buy.

      And considering this, Google and Fa[e]cebook will find "a way" to circumvent ANY will of the people. Don't doubt me! Sacramento needs an ENEMA, starting with the legislature.

      [and lobbyists won't be able to 'kill off' this law, they'll just emasculate it and render it irrelevant, like they always do, as soon as "the right people" are in office]

  2. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    Reads like a whose-who, of the whole dirty tech industry

    They're all little wannabe 'Facebook-Analyticas'. Will anyone rescue us???

  3. Mark 85

    We were even treated to one lawmaker - US House Rep Jim Sensenbrenner (R-WI) – saying that if people didn’t like having their personal data sold then maybe they shouldn't use the internet.

    Expect no help from legislators This guy is a good example.

    1. Woodnag

      UK passport

      To renew a UK passport abroad, need to apply on the internet and have an email address for the personalised form to be sent.

  4. traceyfields
    Pint

    for the subedit

    if Zuck says it long enough, they'll believe his hocuspokus

    - and it's friday, so one for the rest of us too

    1. Felonmarmer

      Re: for the subedit

      Remember you own your own data. So you like cars - you own that fact. You like cats - that's yours too. But you like cars and cats - that's my data, I get to keep that when you delete the rest.

  5. naive

    Yeah right

    We offer you a world wide server network for free, allowing you to do searches, store personal information and share personal information with friends.

    It annually costs many billions of dollars to operate the servers required for these services.

    It is OK to outlaw the business model financing these services, the many billions of users are impatiently sitting with a credit card behind their computer to pay us annual subscriptions for using these services.

    Greetings from Google, Facebook, Reddit, youtube.... and all the other internet services privacy nerds will not be using. Better exchange your free Android phone too for an iPhone, since paying guarantees privacy.. right ?. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No_free_lunch_theorem

    1. doublelayer Silver badge

      Re: Yeah right

      I don't use many of them. If they collected data on me regardless, as many of them are known to do, then they should face consequences. Even if it isn't illegal for them to buy data or steal it, I don't see why we shouldn't make it illegal if we oppose it. I oppose it, so such laws get my support. By the way, I am perfectly willing to pay for some things if it prevents me from having my data stolen. Maybe such companies could test it in good faith before deciding that I shouldn't get that option.

  6. Nimby
    Boffin

    One new line of code in the sale dump Python script...

    if new_law_passed and customer.residence.state == "CA": continue

  7. The Dogs Meevonks Silver badge

    If anyone thinks for a second that as soon as the whole FB/CA privacy thing is blown over with whatever is the latest piece of scandal.. that FB won't be back supporting this as quietly and from as much distance as they can muster... then you're all fools. :)

  8. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    A few heartfelt words about these Poppins headlines

    If El Reg eds think these still work then clearly they are stotious.

    Instead of working hard for clicks they're going through the motions.

    These Poppins rhymes were funny once but now they're repetitious.

    These bobbins rhymes should be shot at birth and buried deep in oceans.

  9. Anonymous Coward
    Black Helicopters

    "Opposition"

    When Facebook drops its opposition to legislation, it passes.

    Does their "opposition" include censorship of users/content supporting the legislation? Which would imply that the only thing impeding passage was legislators/voters not hearing anything positive about it from their "friends".

  10. a_yank_lurker

    Targeted Advertising = Targeted Stupidity

    Targeted advertising makes a critical, often erroneous assumption: one's current online activities reflect one's needs or desires. What is lacking is the context of the activity which may be due to nothing more the pure curiosity or just seeing what is out there. Another missing bit is whether the search has already led to a purchase in which case a targeted ad for the product is pointless. The idea that you can target to nearly an individual level is false. This is because the information is always somewhat out of date (another problem).

    To me, the primary goal of advertising is brand awareness. People do not buy stuff from unfamiliar brands that often especially from a brand they have never heard of. This can be done any of a number of ways including 'word of mouth' but always means that some of the advertising will always fall on the uninterested as John Wanamaker observed.

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Targeted Advertising = Targeted Stupidity

      Indeed, advertising is in danger of becoming a lost art. That whole part about getting the attention of potential customers and **occasionally** reminding them "hey, we exist.. here's what we sell and why you should consider buying it."

      Targeting prospective customers who OPT IN is fine, but going by FB profiles or past purchases is moronic. As they say in every investment prospectus, "Past performance is no guarantee of future results."

  11. Sir Alien

    Big Corps will just ignore the law...

    Example:

    I have a friend, who closed their Amazon (UK) account. This friend then called Amazon and requested all private data be removed (e.g. card details, email, etc). Fair enough they may need to for a short while hold onto your billing address and full name for possibly 'tax' reasons but even this would be limited time.

    Guess what the response was........ Amazon refused.

    My friend then mentioned that under GDPR that they have to comply. Again...... Amazon refused.

    So how well is that GDPR law working out (or any future privacy law). The big corporation, if they want your data, they will have it and they don't give a damn what the law says.

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like