Data about every internet user is shared hundreds of times each day as companies bid for online advertising slots, a report suggests.
The study, by the Irish Council for Civil Liberties (ICCL), found that the average European user’s data is shared 376 times per day.
The figure rises to 747 times daily for US-based users, the report claims.
The revenue from digital adverts is what keeps most internet services free to use.
data about US web users’ habits are shared in advert sales processes 107 trillion times per year. European users’ data is shared 71 billion times
Will the info release break Tether? Clearly they’ve been doing shady stuff … I strongly doubt they are fully backed and I hear they were caught out in the Evergrande collapse (ongoing). If Tether gets dumped because of this how will it affect the crypto market? If Tether is holding a sizeable chunk of bitcoin, they may be forced to sell like Terra was last week which contributed to the bitcoin price drop – and Tether has a larger marketcap than Terra did.
I read through the first part of the court opinion … it looks to me like the fifth circuit court of appeals just neutered the US SEC.
It’s mostly predicated on the fact that the US constitution requires a trial by jury – and congress, in creating the SEC, unconstitutionally delegated legislative power to it … well the court says “no” - meaning that unless this ruling is overturned in a higher court, the SEC officially is neutered.
My mind not quite getting around the implications. Are past SEC rullings now essentially void?
Must be. Massive fines they imposed without “proper” authority?
That would be implied … and not sure there is a way around it (assuming this isn’t overturned by a higher court). Congress can’t null and void a jury trial requirement as it’s a constitutional right.
I’ve only read the headlines, but why would a constitutional right apply to a business? Did the authors have anything in mind other than rights for individuals? There do seen to be problems with how the US Constitution has been interpreted rather than the document or its intentions, not least the amazing “money is speech” which allows those with money to drown out the speech of those without
I don’t think it’s about the legal entity. The legal entity doesn’t have a will, so it’s not what is being judged - it’s the people running the business that are being judged.
I think the law treats legal entities as persons in the sense that a group of people can use such to act as one ‘person’ for the ease of contracting. But it’s not clear to me how this is disambiguated by the courts. I am certainly not a legal expert.