4 ms·

Not quite. It's not that there must be a law for everything, it's that there are laws for many things, and often for good reasons. It's not that we always need

Not quite. It's not that there must be a law for everything, it's that there are laws for many things, and often for good reasons. It's not that we always need to regulate new things because new means risky. It's that many new things are actually old things in new guises, and we already know (or should know) what to be concerned about.

omnimus 10y ago
Paradox is that US still has no regulations concerning digital privacy, big data and user protection.
- mirekrusin 10y ago
  ...at the same time granting patents on double clicking.
- manigandham 10y ago
  The internet moves fast, progress is being made. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/27/the-fcc-just-passed-sweeping-new-rules-to-protect-your-online-privacy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/27...
- pjc50 10y ago
  People have paid good money to make sure there aren't such laws. It only has privacy laws based on incidents that have affected people of sufficient status: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act (and note the little coda in there about Netflix)
marincounty 10y ago
We have a law for pretty much everything. Food laws--fine. Most laws--fine. But in the United States, the fines/fees for breaking these laws are just unfair. The same old analogy comming up. A rich man get's a $500 red light ticket. He tells the wife over dinner. With the poor man gets the same ticket; it just might be the last straw. I'm getting so tired of writing that senerio, but I guarantee someone's rent is in jeopardy right now because of the excessive penalty. I don't mind laws. I don't like being overcharged for the infraction. We live in a society where the rich can do pretty much as they please. I don't think the founding fathers would approve. For awhile, I belive the 8th admendment has been grossly violated. Laws--fine, but tie fees/punishment to income. It's way overdue. I believe Sweden took the plunge?

omnimus 10y ago

Paradox is that US still has no regulations concerning digital privacy, big data and user protection.

mirekrusin 10y ago
...at the same time granting patents on double clicking.
manigandham 10y ago
The internet moves fast, progress is being made. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/27/the-fcc-just-passed-sweeping-new-rules-to-protect-your-online-privacy/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2016/10/27...
pjc50 10y ago
People have paid good money to make sure there aren't such laws. It only has privacy laws based on incidents that have affected people of sufficient status: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Video_Privacy_Protection_Act (and note the little coda in there about Netflix)

marincounty 10y ago

We have a law for pretty much everything. Food laws--fine. Most laws--fine. But in the United States, the fines/fees for breaking these laws are just unfair. The same old analogy comming up. A rich man get's a $500 red light ticket. He tells the wife over dinner. With the poor man gets the same ticket; it just might be the last straw. I'm getting so tired of writing that senerio, but I guarantee someone's rent is in jeopardy right now because of the excessive penalty. I don't mind laws. I don't like being overcharged for the infraction. We live in a society where the rich can do pretty much as they please. I don't think the founding fathers would approve. For awhile, I belive the 8th admendment has been grossly violated. Laws--fine, but tie fees/punishment to income. It's way overdue. I believe Sweden took the plunge?