We need a law that a human representative can be spoken to within 24 hours or directly when something critical happens.

Also “there is no appeal possible” should be plain illegal.

burnt-resistor an hour ago | parent | next [-]

Technofeudalism is what happens when grossly under-regulated anarcho-capitalism dominates rather than sustainable, more ordinary capitalism where government regulation is the supreme, minimized biased arbiter that keeps things fairer and sensible for the benefit of the many rather than the benefit of the few.

▲

gzread 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

In the EU, under GDPR, it is legally required to explain automated profiling.

▲

emsixteen 2 hours ago | parent [-]

How's that work? Got a link handy to explain to a dummy?

	▲	buzer 2 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Article 13(2)(f) "In addition to the information referred to in paragraph 1, the controller shall, at the time when personal data are obtained, provide the data subject with the following further information necessary to ensure fair and transparent processing: the existence of automated decision-making, including profiling, referred to in Article 22(1) and (4) and, at least in those cases, meaningful information about the logic involved, as well as the significance and the envisaged consequences of such processing for the data subject." EDPB Guidelines on automated decision making: https://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/article29/items/612053 especially page 25 is relevant C‑634/21 is also somewhat relevant to understand how courts have applied ADM in general context of credit reporting https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=CELEX%3A... though it didn't specify what information actually needs to provided for 13(2)(f).

▲

beng-nl 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I understand the sentiment, but.. do you realize how much more expensive that would make all these services?

I don’t know the number. But personally I think using the services and ‘simply’ only use them if the disappearance isn’t catastrophic and have the price be low or free while it works isn’t too bad a trade-off.

Admittedly that’s a big ‘if.’

	▲	alemanek an hour ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That is the wrong way to look at it. If this requirement was in place they would be a bit more careful about terminating accounts because the cost equation would incentivize it. Maybe they would be more careful in their automation or require more than one level of human review before cutting off access. These companies are gatekeepers for their platform. It isn’t crazy to require them to act more responsibly.
	▲	prox 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		These are usually multi billion dollar companies, they’ll be fine, stop worrying about them. Start worrying about the erosion of your rights as a consumer.
	▲	amluto an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		These services are designed such that security sort of depends on reviewing the programs that are allowed to run. Microsoft, Google and Apple all do this. It adds expense, annoyance, limitations, and really very little security. The contrasting approach, where one designs a platform that remains secure even if the owner is allowed to run whatever software they like, may be more complex but is overall much better. There aren’t many personal-use systems like this, but systems like AWS take this approach and generally do quite well with it.
	▲	_imnothere 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		They sure do earn enough money to afford whatever number that is on your mind.
	▲	rangerelf 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		If it's impossible for a service provider to even talk to its customers, why is it in operation at all?
	▲	harel 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		Honestly, it's not our problem. Once a service becomes so vital it cannot be terminated without any meaningful process. My meta developer account is suspended and none of my appeals are responded to . Who can I talk to? Nobody. It's wrong.
	▲	chromacity 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		> I understand the sentiment, but.. do you realize how much more expensive that would make all these services? It wouldn't. For example, before Gmail, email was often free or nearly free (bundled with your internet service), but in most cases, you could talk to a human if you had issues with the service. What we couldn't do is turn these business models into planetary-scale behemoths that rake in hundreds of billions of dollars in revenue. In essence, you couldn't have Google or Facebook with good customer support. I'm not here to argue that Google or Facebook are a net negative, but the trade-offs here are different from what you describe.
	▲	thefounder 2 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		I don't think they would be so much more expensive but they would be less profitable for sure and perhaps less "innovative" as a big chunk of the profit will go into regulation stuff.