Texas sues Meta, saying it misused facial recognition data

Re:Texas sues Meta, saying it misused facial recognition data by krapp on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @07:39AM (#30345666)

But the rules are already in place and set up - the ones people want to ignore and pretend don't exist if they don't see them, even though they signed on the dotted line, as it were.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Texas sues Meta, saying it misused facial recognition data by roblabla on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @07:46AM (#30345725)

"The rules" are in place, but we can change them if we, as a society, decide that they don't work, or don't reflect reality, or cost too much.

Besides, if the vast majority of people ignores a rule, maybe it means that the rule is ripe for changing. That doesn't necessarily mean removing TOS entirely, mind you. There are a bunch of other solutions. We could enforce minimum standards for human-readable, short form presentation of TOS. We could enforce what they may and may not restrict, in order to allow users to accept with reasonable minimum expectations of what they're accepting.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Texas sues Meta, saying it misused facial recognition data by piva00 on Tuesday February 15, 2022 @08:56AM (#30346417)

Sure.

Have you read in their entirety every single ToS you ever signed?

If you didn't, why do you expect others to have? And if you don't expect others to have read stuff they agreed to, how fucking realistic is it that the rules say that everyone should abide by something that's simply impossible for a normal human being to do?

The rules exist and they are fucking dumb. Or better if I say: not grounded in reality?

[ Parent | on HN ]