Meta wants EU users to apply for permission to opt out of data collection

I disagree with your premise.

Whatsapp wasn't always owned by FB/Meta. It had a huge user base then got bought out.

Alternatives like Signal are popular, but it's hard to overcome inertia. Give them time.

Another way of thinking of it is that the value that Meta/Mastercard/Virgin/other companies that fit that description provide is so substantial that they have become intertwined with society.

The reality is likely somewhere in the middle IMO

It only works reliable for messages directly addressed to a person. Then people remember, oh he does not have WhatsApp. I will tell him via signal.

Or they won't and you will be left out of things.

Not even out of malice! Obviously your closest friend and family will adapt and keep you in the loop. Bigger looser groups are more dubious. I'm a member of a book club for example. There are of course the scheduled meets, organised well in advance. But also sometimes someone just feels like hanging and posts a message on a whatsapp group that they will be at this or that location and whoever is free is welcome to join. Schedules don't always permit it, but when it works out it is fun!

Now of course if someone from the group so want to meet with specifically you/me they will remember to send a one-on-one message, but there is a power in the broadcast nature of some of these things for organisation.

If I leave these, people are not going to reach out to me about them. I will just cast myself as an outsider and will be left out of the loop.

That's a big leap of faith.

I've encountered this everywhere, even with myself. I'm bad at keeping in touch to begin with. Anyone decided not to use normal means to communicate with me are likely to get missed among the hundred plus other people I know.

I'm not on Facebook, so I'm left out of the majority of my family's communication. The only reason I know anything is I regularly call my parents to get the summary. (It's also a good excuse to call. We always have something to talk about.)

most informal social groups, parents included, now communicate mainly on whatsapp. You can naturally say no (i did) but then your kid is left out of most social events unless you're actively syncing with other parents every week to be in the loop (which is what i do and it's excruciating).

Whatsapp as a platform is extremely convenient, which is why other people will have a hard time understanding your reluctance to adhere, it's not uncommon to be seen as eccentric.

so again, congratulations on finding a great company, but there are real issues with the general social dependence on a single invasive platform.

But as op mentioned

> kids' sports activities and parent groups

Try telling your kids football team coach that you object to Whatsapp and your kids friends' parents that you will not join Facebook for privacy reasons, it's a much harder ask, they might say fine, but you can't expect other people to change their behavior based on your beliefs. No matter how right you are.

IANAL but if this is on your personal device they can't compel you to do so. Otherwise they need to provide a company issued device.

Ha!

I so don't trust Meta.

I wouldn't put it past them to double encrypt your messages and split it off at the server.

Edit: Clarification: Encrypt your plaintext twice, append it, split it off at the server. Send your message on to recipient and decrypt it themselves for their processing enjoyment.

After seeing the lengths various govts will go to for full text access, I highly doubt it. There is also no way to reliably prove the e2ee claims of WA, so I would remain skeptical.

And before anyone says "Well, sucks to not know basic tech stuff", consider the fact that in a world where no-one has privacy, the person using Facebook from a VM is eminently more trackable than in a world where privacy is enforced globally.

Remember when they got the biggest fine ever, like 5B (EUR or USD can't remember) and the moment this decision was made public the stock went up as traders had thought the fine is even bigger.

> They are legally required to keep EU users' data in the EU anyway.

It's not about what you are legally required to do, it's about what happens in practice when you don't. In this case, not much happens, so why would they bother complying?

But how many are tech savy enough to have a separate device and run Aguard / Pi Hole all the time for privacy.

So, when they plan to actually start fining?

> "2% of its entire global turnover of the preceding fiscal year"

I'd like to see this fine in the case of Meta and Google, but we both know it'll never happen.

"The less severe infringements could result in a fine of up to €10 million, or 2% of the firm’s worldwide annual revenue from the preceding financial year, whichever amount is higher."

"The more serious infringements go against the very principles of the right to privacy and the right to be forgotten that are at the heart of the GDPR. These types of infringements could result in a fine of up to €20 million, or 4% of the firm’s worldwide annual revenue from the preceding financial year, whichever amount is higher."

https://gdpr.eu/fines/

The thing is most people would probably choose the wrong alternative, i.e. telegram, whose communications aren't endtoend encrypted by default, as a replacement instead of more decent alternatives. It wouldn't be a win over whatsapp.

You can show up at one of their offices and tell their janitor, and they should still comply.

That's why most companies now train every employee how to handle users requesting deletion (usually by forwarding the request to someone whose job it is to action them).

[1]: https://medium.com/@sandeepbhalothia/a-b27d3f83ee73#:~:text=...

I've got some help from Sweden's IMY for a similar case, asked for the removal of my data by emailing a GDPR template, got no answer and no resolution by the company in a few months and contacted IMY who solved it (and fined them).