SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
FTC 'Failed Miserably' in Punishing Facebook With $5 Billion Fine, Democrats Say
The Federal Trade Commission, which has been investigating Facebook in the wake of its massive Cambridge Analytica scandal, has voted to approve levying a massive $5 billion fine against the social media giant, according to reporting in both the Wall Street Journal and the Washington Post. It's the single largest fine against a tech company by the FTC to date, but its inadequacy to curtail future breaches of this sort already has progressive lawmakers furious
Facebook was aware of a fine of this magnitude potentially coming down the pike for some time, and braced for a hit between $3 billion and $5 billion. The approval vote—which reportedly split down party lines, with three Republicans voting in favor and two Democrats against—was on the higher end of the expected spectrum.
This is expected to cap the agency's investigation into the data-mining scandal that compromised up to 87 million Facebook users' personal data. The data was originally harvested using a seemingly benign quiz app on the platform but was later potentially used by Cambridge Analytica, a political consultancy, for the unrelated purpose of political ad targeting.
Both the FTC and Facebook declined to comment. [...]
(Score: 4, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday July 21 2019, @10:38PM (15 children)
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday July 21 2019, @10:49PM (2 children)
That is the prevailing theory. Next question: are cops safe drivers?
(Score: 2) by Freeman on Monday July 22 2019, @05:38PM (1 child)
I would say, they're a much safer driver than the average person on the road. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IPlZu_GTp7A [youtube.com]
Joshua 1:9 "Be strong and of a good courage; be not afraid, neither be thou dismayed: for the Lord thy God is with thee"
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday July 22 2019, @10:38PM
They are "officially" taught how to speed, so it makes them safer drivers to speed all the time? There are many cops out there who never seem to do the speed limit, whether they are in patrol cars, or private vehicles. My sister was one of those, and they get away with it, because fellow officers are highly unlikely to ticket them.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Sunday July 21 2019, @11:01PM (8 children)
You have to consider the SCALE as well. If I speed, I pass MAYBE 1000 people who in theory were very slightly less safe. Facebook effectively passed 87 million people in their 'speeding' incident.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Sunday July 21 2019, @11:08PM (7 children)
I don't actually see Facebook's fine as being that out of line.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 22 2019, @01:14AM (6 children)
Everybody here knows your views are so narrow you qualify for medically blind disability support, no need to remind us at every occasion.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 22 2019, @02:33AM (5 children)
Narrow compared to who? I notice once again that there's this apparent complaint without anything material to the complaint. It's like you're just tiredly going through the motions.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 22 2019, @04:14AM (4 children)
The correct term is "to what", khallow. And the answer is "to the limits defined by medical standards [wikipedia.org]". Specifically the "has 20 degrees (diameter) or less of visual field remaining" proviso.
Oh, don't be a bore, dear. Yes, we all know you are always insisting on the material.
We've gotten for quite a while your views of the material world you are living in and that you want the proper credit, or you just walk away.
Well, I'm sure you'll understand my point of view, I like to get into physical. If it makes you freak out, that's fine, le freak c'est chic.
But, come on baby, doing the motions with you is way too loco to my taste, no matter how much you swing your hips, now.
Finally, I hope you'll agree my reply is substantive even if all the matter it addresses is "no matter".
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 22 2019, @04:32AM (3 children)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 22 2019, @04:45AM (2 children)
Foolish me, what was I expecting? Not a funny bone in this fellow's body.
Say khallow, then flush and that's all that is to the matter.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday July 22 2019, @05:01AM (1 child)
Indeed. I'm a bit surprised that we could find some common ground.
I've seen Saturday morning cartoons with better dialogue than you've been cranking out.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday July 22 2019, @05:35AM
Then maybe you'll get this Pay atteshun, boy. Ah'm cuttin' but you ain't bleedin' [youtu.be]
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Tuesday July 23 2019, @06:05PM (2 children)
"Unfair" is the regressive nature of fixed fines. Why should the same penalty hurt one person more than another?
I say make the penalties hurt the same, no matter your financial status.
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Wednesday July 24 2019, @01:49PM (1 child)
What's unfair about that? Don't do it and you don't get the hurtful penalty. Zero penalty in the law abiding situation would be the same level of hurt for everyone.
(Score: 2) by cmdrklarg on Wednesday July 24 2019, @05:30PM
Obviously you don't punish the law abiding person (that never happens, does it?). But we're not talking about that, we're talking about what happens AFTER the law has been broken, and the perp found guilty.
It's unfair due to how the same penalty for an infraction (say $1000 for example) can cause massive financial pain for a poor sod living paycheck to paycheck, but cause no pain at all for the wealthy asshole. The poor guy will likely learn that lesson, but the rich guy won't.
Instead of $1000, how about 100 hours of community service?
The world is full of kings and queens who blind your eyes and steal your dreams.