3 ms·

> Just saying that the politician outrage to legislation sausage factory has produced some duds in this area. The regulation is open to anyone that wants to re

by kartan 9y ago

> Just saying that the politician outrage to legislation sausage factory has produced some duds in this area. The regulation is open to anyone that wants to read it. Which points do you think that are duds? http://www.eugdpr.org/the-regulation.html http://www.eugdpr.org/the-regulation.html

dalbasal 9y ago
I haven't read it (or the underlying legislation being amended), so I don't know. The eprivacy directive amendment (the "cookie law" I was referring to as a dud) didn't show it's flaws until it was implemented by sites in what now appears to be the recommended manner^. Basically, it allowed a generic (and IMO useless) interpretation of informed consent, Most of the discussion (parliamentary and otherwise) was around tracking and privacy. What seemed to have fueled it was retargetting. To the best of my knowledge, google analytics, FB advertising or any of the other major ad networks have not made meaningful changes to their systems as a result of the legislation. I think a change to browser defaults could have (still can) have a more meaningful effect than this legislation and all its regional children. The overview you link to, describe the legislation's intent. I agree with the intent. The problems are not there. The problems are with effectiveness in practice. As I said, I don't know the details of this commandment so I don't have those details for you. In the legislation this amends, many of the problems arise from the "user initiated" approach. You have a right to see what data FB have on you, but you need to know FB have info on you to ask about. It also (as this article suggests) needs to deal in a lot of grey area around anonymous data. I'm not against laws. I'm not a hater. I'm just skeptical that these issues can be resolved solely or even primarily via legislation. ^see here: http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm#section_4 http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm#se...

by kartan 9y ago

dalbasal 9y ago

I haven't read it (or the underlying legislation being amended), so I don't know. The eprivacy directive amendment (the "cookie law" I was referring to as a dud) didn't show it's flaws until it was implemented by sites in what now appears to be the recommended manner^. Basically, it allowed a generic (and IMO useless) interpretation of informed consent, Most of the discussion (parliamentary and otherwise) was around tracking and privacy. What seemed to have fueled it was retargetting. To the best of my knowledge, google analytics, FB advertising or any of the other major ad networks have not made meaningful changes to their systems as a result of the legislation. I think a change to browser defaults could have (still can) have a more meaningful effect than this legislation and all its regional children. The overview you link to, describe the legislation's intent. I agree with the intent. The problems are not there. The problems are with effectiveness in practice. As I said, I don't know the details of this commandment so I don't have those details for you. In the legislation this amends, many of the problems arise from the "user initiated" approach. You have a right to see what data FB have on you, but you need to know FB have info on you to ask about. It also (as this article suggests) needs to deal in a lot of grey area around anonymous data. I'm not against laws. I'm not a hater. I'm just skeptical that these issues can be resolved solely or even primarily via legislation. ^see here: http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm#section_4 http://ec.europa.eu/ipg/basics/legal/cookies/index_en.htm#se...