6 ms·
As somebody who values privacy greatly something about the GDPR just doesn't sit right with me, which is confusing and conflicting because somebody who values p
by shiado 8y ago
As somebody who values privacy greatly something about the GDPR just doesn't sit right with me, which is confusing and conflicting because somebody who values privacy should be naturally aligned with it.
After thinking long and hard about the GDPR the part that bothers me the most is the expectation from the EU that foreign entities enforce their regulations because the EU cannot bare the political consequences of doing it themselves.
Imagine if China decided that Chinese citizens accessing foreign servers was a breach of national security due to the ability of these foreign servers to collect private browsing information, and imagine if China decided to make laws that fined these foreign entities in violation of their laws. It would be a fucking joke and it would be ridiculed internationally for good reason. China obviously knows this and they are prepared to get their hands dirty and implement the Great Firewall of China because they have no problem appearing as a controlling and authoritarian state.
So why doesn't Europe just do what China does and build their own firewall? If they really wanted to restrict collection by foreign servers which exist in non-EU jurisdictions and apply the regulation internally in the EU then they have the technical capacity to do so with a firewall.
Europe just can't bare the consequences of building such a firewall because it would destroy them in the court of public opinion. If EU citizens suddenly lost access to American services all hell would break loose. On a more political level the EU is a place which is generally known as being liberal and open and the construction of a mechanism designed to enforce their regulations by closing them off from the outside internet would be the construction of an authoritarian tool of censorship and restriction of freedom.
- zerostar07 8y agoAs an EU citizen I agree. Also, GDPR is problematic because it confuses privacy with invisibility. I hope this problematic law is amended soon.
- TomK32 8y agoI'm sorry, but what part of the GDPR do you think demands invisibility? It doesn't even mention privacy because the GDPR stands of General Data PROTECTION Regulation.
- zerostar07 8y agothe part where you are not allowed to profile the user based on a piece of information for which it is impossible to obtain consent (IP address). The law does not mention privacy, correct, but its entire rationale is based on the idea of privacy rights.
- TomK32 8y agoThe IP itself isn't much use in the context of personal identifiable information with more data say from the person's internet provider. Also, having http logs with IP addresses (stored for a reasonable short amount of time) is still allowed as it is a necessity to provide any service at all. The regulation isn't about fucking IP addresses, it's about big data collection information about, what you buy, where you go, who you are friends with and doing shady things with that data.
- _csoz 8y ago> it's about big data collection information This can be achieved with more sane, pragmatic regulation.
- TomK32 8y agoImagine your country claiming taxes from you even though you are an ex-patriate and not living in that country. Oh, that does happen. You can't just build a firewall for data, especially as users will actually willingly export data. You look at the GDPR from a business side only and miss that it is about personal data and how that data has become a commodity that is being traded, mishandled and often abused. So far none of the US-based services that I use has shut down or blocked me just because I'm under the protection of the GDPR. Those websites we see blocking users have either no interest in the European market (fair enough) or are indeed using shady practices.
- zerostar07 8y ago> Oh, that does happen. That's based on international law, while there is no such thing about privacy
- mbroncano 8y agoActually it isn’t, in fact the US is kind of unique in that sense.
- TomK32 8y agoThere's also Eritrea.
- rad_gruchalski 8y agoWow, that makes it two.
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- pacifika 8y agohttps://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ https://www.un.org/en/universal-declaration-human-rights/ Universal Declaration of Human Rights: Article 12
- lurena 8y ago>After thinking long and hard about the GDPR the part that bothers me the most is the expectation from the EU that foreign entities enforce their regulations because the EU cannot bare the political consequences of doing it themselves. That sort of thing happens all the time - except the US is usually the one coercing foreign entities. Remember the DMCA? ThePirateBay's raid in 2006? Or the Megaupload debacle? Or how Japan was pressured by the US to adopt stricter child pornography laws? Note, I'm not saying the people behind these were supporting moral and noble causes that the US was wrong to clamp down on. I'm certainly not saying people should comply to China's expectations on free speech and flow of information. Simply, if you feel infuriated that a foreign power is enforcing its worldview and related regulations onto you, an American citizen, know that that's what literally everyone else has been experiencing for the last decades from the people you've put in power. But then, what the EU is trying to enforce here - more power to Internet users, essentially - is fairly benign when compared to what other foreign powers would like to enforce. If there were matters of infuriation to be had on that account, I'd start with the Mariott debacle [1]. [1] https://boingboing.net/2018/01/15/willfull-liking.html https://boingboing.net/2018/01/15/willfull-liking.html
- deleted 8y ago[deleted]
- dogma1138 8y agoThe DMCA does not magically apply extra territorially. It’s applied through an established legal framework either through bilateral trade agreements or through WTO rules. The majority of copyright enforcement outside of the US has nothing to do with the DMCA but rather copyright holders using local legal frameworks. The problem with the GDPR is that it’s extraterritorial application as expected by the EU is also extrajudiciary. I would have no problem with the EU seeking ways to expand GDPR through new legal frameworks which the people that would be impacted by these changes can actually control through their own political system. What I have a problem with is the EU essentially forcing compliance through extortion and sooner rather than later it will employ the companies that the GDPR was in spirit intended to protect us from to enforce it. I don’t see the EU being able to enforce the GDPR even internally without essentially deputizing the likes of Google, Amazon and PayPal to enforce it across all of their customers in order for them themselves to be compliant. Even with the fines possible under the GDPR the EU can not enforce compliance by targeting 100,000’s of small companies without going essentially bankrupt. It can however effectively target the big ones and worse make it impossible to operate within the EU without using their “GDPR complaint” platforms. The GDPR might be a great thing on paper and even in spirit but the uncertainty and the inability to enforce complex regulation on a mass of small entities would likely cause it’s real world repercussions to be quite different than from what was imagined or intended.
- downandout 8y agoImagine if China decided that Chinese citizens accessing foreign servers was a breach of national security due to the ability of these foreign servers to collect private browsing information, and imagine if China decided to make laws that fined these foreign entities in violation of their laws. I agree with you. Fortunately, at least in the case of GDPR, we don't have to worry about it, as this article is completely off base legally. While I'm sure there are many in the EU that would love for it to be illegal for foreign entities to block EU residents, here's the reality of this. Under Recital 23 [1], you are not subject to the GDPR if you are outside of the EU and it cannot be established that you "envisage" servicing EU customers. This Recital explicitly states that the mere accessibility of a foreign website from within the EU does not by itself subject the site to the GDPR. In other words, none of the GDPR applies to foreign websites that are blocking EU residents, because they have shown that they don't intend to serve EU residents. Since the law doesn't apply, its restrictions on automated profiling don't apply either (and you can legally store their IP address and any other information gleaned from HTTP requests for eternity and not bother responding to their "nightmare letters"). I find articles written in bad faith like this odd on a number of levels. Do people in the EU really want to falsely make sites in other parts of the world believe that they must comply with this absurd legislation? It's almost like they are trying to say "HA! We have power over you and can force you to do whatever we want!". It seems like a weird and desperate power struggle. Block the EU, and GDPR doesn't apply (as long as you don't already hold EU resident data). It's as simple as that. [1] http://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/recital-23-GDPR.htm http://www.privacy-regulation.eu/en/recital-23-GDPR.htm
- thisisit 8y agoAs somebody who values privacy greatly something about the GDPR just doesn't sit right with me, which is confusing and conflicting because somebody who values privacy should be naturally aligned with it. After thinking long and hard about the GDPR the part that bothers me the most is the expectation from the EU that foreign entities enforce their regulations because the EU cannot bare the political consequences of doing it themselves. I might be reading this wrong but you are saying that as a privacy valuing individual GDPR your issue is that because it is a single entity - EU has come up with the law. And the solution is not that every country in the world should pass privacy laws rather European countries should build a China-like firewall?
- arrrg 8y agoIf you want to sell your wine-picker in the EU you have to adhere to the local regulations. If you want to offer your services in the EU you have to adhere to local regulations.
- dogma1138 8y agoThat’s not technically correct. I can sell a wine picker to an EU customer without worrying about any regulation as they are the responsible entity.
- arrrg 8y agoI think you misunderstood me. Local = EU. This was written from the perspective of a non-EU company (but obviously equally applies to EU companies).