[HN Gopher] Breaking Free
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Breaking Free
        
       Author : Aissen
       Score  : 174 points
       Date   : 2026-02-27 09:56 UTC (13 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.forbrukerradet.no)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.forbrukerradet.no)
        
       | Epa095 wrote:
       | From the english letter:
       | 
       | To achieve a better digital world, where technology works for
       | people rather than against them, several steps must be taken:
       | 
       | 1. _Rebalance power between service providers and consumers._
       | People should be allowed to control their digital experiences and
       | decide how they want to use products that they own. It should be
       | possible and practical to switch to alternative service
       | providers, or tweak services they already use to suit their needs
       | and preferences.
       | 
       | 2. _Tackle dependency on Big Tech._ To lay the groundwork for
       | innovative products and services and pave the way for
       | alternatives to Big Tech, competition in digital markets must be
       | restored. Technology based on principles such as openness,
       | interoperability and portability must be advanced through
       | strategic investments. For example, the public sector should
       | leverage its power as a major procurer to support alternatives to
       | big tech through exploring options for ethical procurement of
       | technology services.
       | 
       | 3. _Double down on the enforcement of existing laws._ Far from
       | hindering innovation, regulations provide crucial guardrails to
       | guide innovation and ensure a level playing field. Weak
       | enforcement allows big tech to continue its damaging practices at
       | the cost of freedom of choice, service quality, and innovation.
       | To remedy this, enforcement of existing laws must be strong and
       | vigorous. This includes the DMA and competition laws more
       | broadly, but also other digital rules such as the GDPR and
       | consumer law.
       | 
       | 4. _Close the existing legal loopholes by adopting a strong
       | Digital Fairness Act._ Increase legal certainty and address
       | loopholes in the legislation to better protect people for
       | instance against deceptive and addictive design, and unfair
       | personalisation.
        
         | girvo wrote:
         | I hope this leads to them pushing for Jolla and similar to not
         | be locked out of banking apps (and EU IDs...)
        
         | Nursie wrote:
         | Reinstate strong powers to understand and adapt devices you
         | own, rather than pandering to US industry interests.
        
       | madspindel wrote:
       | "Meta estimates that ten percent of the company's annual revenue
       | comes from fraudulent ads on its services - amounting to a
       | dizzying 16 billion dollars.
       | 
       | - Meta is earning billions from consumers being scammed. Even if
       | the company gets fined - a process that takes years - the fines
       | we have seen so far only amount to a fraction of these profits.
       | In other words, Meta has no incentive to solve the problem.
       | Meanwhile, the company doesn't lift a finger to help its users,
       | whether their profiles are misused in the scam ads, or they fall
       | victim to the scams, Myrstad says. "
        
         | notachatbot123 wrote:
         | Where is that quote sourced?
        
           | llm_nerd wrote:
           | https://www.forbrukerradet.no/news-in-english/digital-
           | produc...
           | 
           | You can find the 10% from scam thing all over the place. ala-
           | 
           | https://www.reuters.com/investigations/meta-is-earning-
           | fortu...
        
         | Nursie wrote:
         | And somehow they are allowed to continue operating, and we
         | accept them saying "we couldn't possibly actually police all
         | this content! There's just too much of it. We're too large for
         | such concerns!"
         | 
         | I really wish the rest of us could turn around and say, to
         | their faces "That sounds like a you problem"
        
           | brador wrote:
           | It's like fake products on Amazon. The numbers are jaw
           | dropping, the punishment non existent.
           | 
           | If a real store had that much fake stock it would be shut
           | overnight.
        
         | darkwater wrote:
         | It should be easy: 10% of revenue from fraudulent ads? Fines
         | amounting to 15% of the total revenue. This way, Meta will be
         | incentivized to invest ~5% of its revenue on getting rid of
         | that 10%.
        
           | alphawhisky wrote:
           | Yes but also include accountability in the boardroom. If
           | illegal things happen, a human needs to see court, not a
           | company. Let the "risk takers" actually take on risk.
        
           | limagnolia wrote:
           | The US Postal Service seems to derive upwards of 90% of their
           | revenue (Or at least of the mail I receive) from similar
           | scams. Are they going to have the same fines applied to them?
        
             | MarkusQ wrote:
             | Common carrier vs. curated platform?
        
             | NoMoreNicksLeft wrote:
             | The US Postal Service doesn't serve the American people, by
             | its own admission. I can find the quote from the Postmaster
             | General if you like, but the gist of it was "the 400 direct
             | mailers are our customers". They are a spam company that
             | has outlived its usefulness, if ever it had any. Don't fine
             | them, dissolve them.
        
             | woah wrote:
             | And you can't escape. Facebook is less of a concern because
             | you can just not go to the website and you're good. The US
             | Postal Service is the basis of an entire huge industry
             | devoted to finding you at your physical location to try to
             | scam you.
        
             | thenewnewguy wrote:
             | How would you find a government entity? This is just moving
             | money from one government budget to another.
             | 
             | The USPS is like this because of the persistent belief that
             | it's not enough for government entities (think USPS,
             | Amtrak, etc) to provide a good service for the citizens -
             | they must also (try to) turn a profit.
             | 
             | If we as a society considered it acceptable for the USPS to
             | spend money to ensure everyone in the US had mail access
             | without selling out to corporations to turn a profit, they
             | wouldn't need to have products like EDDM blasting spam to
             | entire zip codes.
        
               | Avicebron wrote:
               | The whole governmental agencies should be profit seeking
               | businesses needs to died ignobly in a ditch. The reason
               | we pay taxes is so that we don't have to handle the
               | logistics of running the thing we pay for.
        
             | jandrese wrote:
             | You have a very different profile of junk mail than I do.
             | While the services may be overpriced or of dubious quality,
             | they are rarely outright scams the way FB marketplace
             | frequently is.
        
             | mikestew wrote:
             | If you think there is actual fraud going on via the US
             | mail, report it. The Postal Service takes mail fraud very
             | seriously.
             | 
             | But I suspect you mean to say 90% of what ends up in your
             | mailbox is junk. If that's the case, there's a fix for
             | that, too:
             | 
             | https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36131222
        
           | latexr wrote:
           | Considering that 10% percent estimate seems to come from Meta
           | themselves, if they were fined that amount what would stop
           | them from just estimating lower next time?
        
         | limagnolia wrote:
         | From the sources I have seen, that 10% was a projection for
         | 2024, with goals to significantly reduce it in 2025 and 2026
         | onward. It also includes "banned" goods, which are not
         | necessarily fraudulent nor illegal. I have not seen any data on
         | whether or not Meta has achieved their goals of reducing fraud
         | and banned goods advertising.
        
           | dotandgtfo wrote:
           | Considering the absolute deluge of politicians and
           | celebrities allegedly promoting financial scams on norwegian
           | Facebook my hunch is absolutely not.
        
       | kruffalon wrote:
       | It is so nice to see that in reality there already are useful
       | laws to combat enshittification, we just need to use them.
       | 
       | It is also hopeful that publicly funded organisation asks for
       | better governance rather than just bowing down.
       | 
       | Obviously it is in the Zeitgeist to do this now, could (should)
       | have been written 20years ago, but who would have listened?
        
       | skrebbel wrote:
       | Seriously the production value on that video is way too good
        
         | d-us-vb wrote:
         | The deadpan irony is on point. Something it seems the
         | Norwegians have perfected.
         | 
         | Another one of my favorite examples of this (an ad for Oslo
         | tourism): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8vhD59ac7nw
        
           | colinprince wrote:
           | I think a city should feel a little hard to get
        
           | Sammi wrote:
           | I mean that's fine I guess. But the best deadpan Norwegian
           | sketch is kammelasa: https://youtu.be/s-mOy8VUEBk
        
         | schappim wrote:
         | 100%! I thought it was going to be way shittier. Suspect a
         | budget > $1M was spent.
        
           | renhanxue wrote:
           | The Norwegian Consumer Council's entire yearly budget is
           | about 100M NOK, or about $9.5M USD at the current exchange
           | rate. They most assuredly did not spend >$1M USD on a short
           | video clip.
        
         | ruralfam wrote:
         | Wow gotta agree. It was satire I think, but... not sure. Also
         | the below link to the Oslo ad was also great. Thx for this, RF
        
       | uzish wrote:
       | What is a fraudulent ad? If a massive health influencer promotes
       | a "healthy" powder that in labs does not show health benefits -
       | do we consider it a fraudulent ad?
        
         | jandrese wrote:
         | On Facebook? It's ads for products where they do a bait and
         | switch or claim to have some kind of "difficulty" and never
         | ship a product or ship some garbage instead.
         | 
         | Example: My wife saw an ad for decorative skulls that were made
         | in such a way that you can safely put them in a campfire for
         | Halloween. They had a video and everything, it looked pretty
         | good. She orders a set and they get delayed, then she gets and
         | email saying that US Customs would not let them in the country
         | and they instead ship a $0.50 plastic Christmas tree ornament
         | instead and immediately ghost her.
         | 
         | We reported the company to Facebook but it continued to run for
         | weeks. I've also seen ads for $500 Aventon E-bike "closeout"
         | that's clearly a scam, reported it, and had no action from
         | Facebook. Another ad for an all metal "puzzle kit" of a V8
         | engine listed for $50 that I guarantee is fake. Every day I get
         | ads that would not have passed the smell test from any reviewer
         | yet continue to run.
        
           | uzish wrote:
           | Do you see this as different than the example I gave of a
           | health influencer promoting a health powder with false
           | claims?
        
       | socalgal2 wrote:
       | I'm sure this will be downvoted but the fact that the front page
       | of this site features photos of the organizers means to me, this
       | is a promotional movement for these people, not a serious
       | organization. Seeing their faces filling up large portions of the
       | front page means the actual supposed point of their supposed
       | purpose is being subverted for self promotion.
        
         | em-bee wrote:
         | the front page does not feature the organizers, it features
         | links to a video and a seminar, and the seminar and the video
         | happen to feature the speakers. featuring speakers of a seminar
         | is what i expect, because i want to know who is talking.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2026-02-27 23:01 UTC)