3 ms·

>>I think the cost of not having this law is much higher. The solution severely confines the space of operation, by straightjacketing web service provisioning

>>I think the cost of not having this law is much higher. The solution severely confines the space of operation, by straightjacketing web service provisioning to a narrowly defined set of procedures, and thus I think it's unlikely to be less costly than the problem it seeks to solve. Creativity does not flow from this kind of central planning. I believe the blind spot that GDPR advocates have is that they don't fully grasp the scope of what they don't know and what has not yet been discovered, and thus they don't fully account for the cost of laws that inhibit the innovative processes that lead to discovering new ways of providing goods/services. The responsible way of addressing privacy concerns, that would have been far less likely to undermine liberty and have other negative unintended consequences, would have been to develop user friendly anonymous browsing technology, like Tor-enabled browsers.

riquito 8y ago
> The responsible way of addressing privacy concerns [...] would have been to develop user friendly anonymous browsing technology, like Tor-enabled browsers. After you reach anonymously a service (e.g. Facebook) and login you won't get any help from Tor or similar technologies. You need a law to tell the other party to not mess with your privacy
- CryptoPunk 8y ago
  A browser that doesn't store cookies and anonymizes your IP will prevent things like a Facebook tracking you across the web. The rest is an issue of contract law. No one is forcing you to use Facebook, thus it is not violating your privacy when you choose to give it your data. Perhaps public education, on how the personal data you disclose to web services can be used, and information on anonymous alternatives, would help in this situation. Whatever the solution, it should not impose arbitrary restrictions on how websites can use the data others disclose to them, or obligate a web provider to respond to letters they receive. These are Big Brother laws that will limit the availability of services by severely constraining the space of operation. I want to be able to use the web without other people's overbearing laws severely limiting the range of websites and services available.

riquito 8y ago

> The responsible way of addressing privacy concerns [...] would have been to develop user friendly anonymous browsing technology, like Tor-enabled browsers. After you reach anonymously a service (e.g. Facebook) and login you won't get any help from Tor or similar technologies. You need a law to tell the other party to not mess with your privacy

CryptoPunk 8y ago
A browser that doesn't store cookies and anonymizes your IP will prevent things like a Facebook tracking you across the web. The rest is an issue of contract law. No one is forcing you to use Facebook, thus it is not violating your privacy when you choose to give it your data. Perhaps public education, on how the personal data you disclose to web services can be used, and information on anonymous alternatives, would help in this situation. Whatever the solution, it should not impose arbitrary restrictions on how websites can use the data others disclose to them, or obligate a web provider to respond to letters they receive. These are Big Brother laws that will limit the availability of services by severely constraining the space of operation. I want to be able to use the web without other people's overbearing laws severely limiting the range of websites and services available.