Facebook’s sexist, ageist ad-targeting violates Calif. law, court finds | “Shocking” ruling could have “devastating effects,” tech law expert warns.::“Shocking” ruling could have “devastating effects,” tech law expert warns.

  • oDDmON@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    14
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    Devastating effects=Good for the users

    Also, > “Who needs new privacy laws if the Unruh Act already bans most ad targeting?”

    Indeed?

    edit:also…

    • givesomefucks@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      She’s arguing that she was armed by not seeing specific ads…

      If anything the result of this is more ads than less

      • oDDmON@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        You’re absolutely right, that was her initial argument; but it’s the Unruh Act invocation that makes this interesting, as well as the protected classes being negatively affected by the algorithm.

        Net effect? I’d go with “Less ads in the long run” for $200. But I’ll still cross my fingers.