3 ms·

Don't worry, I am sure it wont be abused. The whole fearfull effect was created by adtech companies trying to create public outrage and paranoia to pretect thei

by _o_ 8y ago

Don't worry, I am sure it wont be abused. The whole fearfull effect was created by adtech companies trying to create public outrage and paranoia to pretect their money source. Be sure that there are going to be some nasty penalties for greatest violaters (like online dating sites) I have noticed a lot of them is packaging GDPR into terms and conditions and privacy policy changes and those will have to get a fine, but I am sure warning will come first. But as one of ICO said (UK?), "We will always try to use carrot instead of stick, but some companies are carnivores, they don't eat carrots." Also I am sure, half of world will have similar laws in next few years. Private data invasion just went to far, this has to be stopped.

downandout 8y ago
Don't worry, I am sure it wont be abused. It would be the first time in history that such a law has not been abused. The fear is real and fully warranted. I am sure warning will come first There is no mandate written into the GDPR requiring warnings before fines, nor is there anything preventing multimillion-dollar fines for first-time, minor violations.
- zaarn 8y ago
  It's not a law it's a regulation and EU regulation is largely intended to be more of a carrot before the unpack the stick. See the Smartphone Charger regulation. It requires all smartphones vendors to come up with a standard for charging, everyone picked microUSB (though moving to USB C now). The EU is fine with that and the smartphone vendors know that if they start pulling the "everyone has their own port" shit again that the EU will get out the stick. Nobody wants the stick. The EU not and the Vendors not. The carrot was the EU Cookie law, which was largely ignored and the consent dialogs poorly implemented (not even asking for consent the majority of the time). So this is them getting out the stick. Now you can pick which one you want. >There is no mandate written into the GDPR requiring warnings before fines, nor is there anything preventing multimillion-dollar fines for first-time, minor violations. Art. 83 of the GDPR details this. Art. 78 details what rights you have against them imposing a fine.
  - downandout 8y ago
    Now you can pick which one you want. I don’t have to pick either. My company is not subject to the GDPR, and we will never put ourselves in a position to be subject to it. I will not be dictated to or threatened by a foreign government. Art. 83 of the GDPR details this. Art. 78 details what rights you have against them imposing a fine. People keep saying things like this, and yet neither article a) requires that a warning be issued before they seek a fine or b) limits fines in any way, except for a top cap of $10 million/$20 million (or percentages of revenue, but the caps are more than 100% of the revenue of most companies). I would love for someone to just say “yes, technically there are no required warnings or limits other than the $10/$20 million”. Because that’s the only true statement that there is about GDPR fines.
    - zaarn 8y ago
      >I don’t have to pick either. My company is not subject to the GDPR, and we will never put ourselves in a position to be subject to it. Canada, Japan and some other countries and even the US have indicated to copy the GDPR if not in letter atleast in spirit, though the US response is a lot weaker. >I will not be dictated to or threatened by a foreign government. The US is a foreign government and does it all the time to me, why is it a problem now? >I would love for someone to just say “yes, technically there are no required warnings or limits other than the $10/$20 million”. Because that’s the only true statement that there is about GDPR fines. You won't have that. The GDPR has a strict guideline on how to impose fines, it's not a law an won't be enforces as such. The regulatory bodies have bite because large players like Facebook or Equifax that leak large amounts of userdata require more than an angry letter in their mailbox. As these articles mention, the agency imposing a fine should severely think about the level of fine and ensure it's appropriate. If you get hacked by a 0-day, you followed the advice of your regulatory body, your shit gets leaked and you inform your users immediately, it's very unlikely anything will happen. If you get hacked because you didn't update your MySQL server in 5 years, you ignored what your regulatory agency said and you don't tell your users, don't expect them to go easy on you. Easy as that. If you don't like it you can sue back and get the fine reduced or rescinded.
      - 8y ago
- SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
  > The fear is real and fully warranted. Much like the cookie law or CAN-SPAM?

by _o_ 8y ago

downandout 8y ago

Don't worry, I am sure it wont be abused. It would be the first time in history that such a law has not been abused. The fear is real and fully warranted. I am sure warning will come first There is no mandate written into the GDPR requiring warnings before fines, nor is there anything preventing multimillion-dollar fines for first-time, minor violations.

zaarn 8y ago
It's not a law it's a regulation and EU regulation is largely intended to be more of a carrot before the unpack the stick. See the Smartphone Charger regulation. It requires all smartphones vendors to come up with a standard for charging, everyone picked microUSB (though moving to USB C now). The EU is fine with that and the smartphone vendors know that if they start pulling the "everyone has their own port" shit again that the EU will get out the stick. Nobody wants the stick. The EU not and the Vendors not. The carrot was the EU Cookie law, which was largely ignored and the consent dialogs poorly implemented (not even asking for consent the majority of the time). So this is them getting out the stick. Now you can pick which one you want. >There is no mandate written into the GDPR requiring warnings before fines, nor is there anything preventing multimillion-dollar fines for first-time, minor violations. Art. 83 of the GDPR details this. Art. 78 details what rights you have against them imposing a fine.
- downandout 8y ago
  Now you can pick which one you want. I don’t have to pick either. My company is not subject to the GDPR, and we will never put ourselves in a position to be subject to it. I will not be dictated to or threatened by a foreign government. Art. 83 of the GDPR details this. Art. 78 details what rights you have against them imposing a fine. People keep saying things like this, and yet neither article a) requires that a warning be issued before they seek a fine or b) limits fines in any way, except for a top cap of $10 million/$20 million (or percentages of revenue, but the caps are more than 100% of the revenue of most companies). I would love for someone to just say “yes, technically there are no required warnings or limits other than the $10/$20 million”. Because that’s the only true statement that there is about GDPR fines.
  - zaarn 8y ago
    >I don’t have to pick either. My company is not subject to the GDPR, and we will never put ourselves in a position to be subject to it. Canada, Japan and some other countries and even the US have indicated to copy the GDPR if not in letter atleast in spirit, though the US response is a lot weaker. >I will not be dictated to or threatened by a foreign government. The US is a foreign government and does it all the time to me, why is it a problem now? >I would love for someone to just say “yes, technically there are no required warnings or limits other than the $10/$20 million”. Because that’s the only true statement that there is about GDPR fines. You won't have that. The GDPR has a strict guideline on how to impose fines, it's not a law an won't be enforces as such. The regulatory bodies have bite because large players like Facebook or Equifax that leak large amounts of userdata require more than an angry letter in their mailbox. As these articles mention, the agency imposing a fine should severely think about the level of fine and ensure it's appropriate. If you get hacked by a 0-day, you followed the advice of your regulatory body, your shit gets leaked and you inform your users immediately, it's very unlikely anything will happen. If you get hacked because you didn't update your MySQL server in 5 years, you ignored what your regulatory agency said and you don't tell your users, don't expect them to go easy on you. Easy as that. If you don't like it you can sue back and get the fine reduced or rescinded.
    - 8y ago
SmellyGeekBoy 8y ago
> The fear is real and fully warranted. Much like the cookie law or CAN-SPAM?