4 ms·
This is reasonable and, as far as I remember, the EU required the same as well.
by akjainaj 10y ago
This is reasonable and, as far as I remember, the EU required the same as well.
- cpncrunch 10y agoNot quite. They just require that you adequately protect PII. Since that is very expensive to do, only large companies tend to do it. Smaller companies probably just ignore it... https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2015/10/european-data-on-usa-servers-safe-harbor/ https://www.wordfence.com/blog/2015/10/european-data-on-usa-...
- qaq 10y agoYou have to account for market size the EU economy is huge Russian economy is about the size of large US city.
- radiorental 10y agoThis is more about sovereignty than GDP
- chatmasta 10y agoHigher GDP allows an economic region to make more demands surrounding their sovereignty.
- disordinary 10y agoAny country is free to make laws around their own sovereignty. Size and power has nothing to do with it. Russia is still a large, connected, and tech savvy country regardless of average income in USD.
- qaq 10y agoNone is disputing that every country can pass whatever laws now having companies care about operating in a given country is very influenced by the GDP and the local laws.
- surfmike 10y agoThe US-EU Safe Harbor Agreement requires that US companies follow the EU's requirements for preserving the privacy and security of users, but allows them to store data in the US.
- cpncrunch 10y agoSafe Harbor doesn't exist any more...
- bjelkeman-again 10y agoReplaced by this. Does anyone know if it is any sgnificantly different? http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-16-216_en.htm
- kodablah 10y agoI disagree that it is reasonable, but that's why these things are good for at least vote if not left up to consumer choice. I couldn't imagine if my country disabled access to worldwide internet services to protect my data. At some point, citizen choice is valuable, and I as a citizen would like to choose to have my data stored in another country if I wanted (and use services that do so).
- cmdrfred 10y agoI agree in principal but consider this. In real terms this law really only creates and UI/UX problem for LinkedIn at a fundamental level. Sort of like hiding some settings in a config file or behind an "advanced users only!" warning, LinkedIn now requires you connect via a VPN/Tor to use it's services. I feel that the users informed enough to setup a VPN are more likely to also understand the implications of giving personal information to LinkedIn. This has a side effect. If LinkedIn wants to do business with Russia it has to allow access from VPN services. Thus allowing for greater piracy for internet users everywhere.
- douche 10y ago> Thus allowing for greater piracy for internet users everywhere. I assume that's a typo for privacy, but expanding vpn/tor usage probably will help make piracy easier for internet users everywhere
- kodablah 10y agoI really really don't like this sentiment. "In real terms" meaning that you have to intentionally break the law. And only advanced users can get the benefit of worldwide internet services otherwise banned. Granted this is an easy opportunity for a whataboutist, hypocrisy point here concerning other countries, and I'd agree with those countries being incorrect too. We should not be encouraging laws like this, and definitely not excusing them by saying that advanced users can circumvent them. If the Russian government really wanted to protect citizens, why not put laws in place on data protection requirements as opposed to data location requirements? (hint: it's because they don't want to protect the citizens)
- deleted 10y ago[deleted]