4 ms·

This is the type of digestible quip that will get non-tech people to vote for more regulation. *I’m not advocating for this usage just illustrating a point

by awat 8y ago

pavel_lishin 8y ago
I don't see "more regulation" as an inherently negative thing.
- awat 8y ago
  Neither do I, I don’t want to overstretch but I’ve seen a lot of blowback on GDPR lately and actions like this are what I think will get the US there eventually too.
- craftyguy 8y ago
  The problem is that folks want either 'no regulation' or 'more regulation'. Neither is the solution. We need regulation that targets specific problems, nothing more and nothing less. Instead we get regulation that may loosely address the problem it was originally drafted to address, but has since grown into a mess of compromises added at the request of lawyers, lobbyists, and uninformed politicians. I'll start: "You cannot send advertising to people when you suspect (e.g. by geofence) they are suffering from a medical emergency."
  - stordoff 8y ago
    > "You cannot send advertising to people when you suspect (e.g. by geofence) they are suffering from a medical emergency." Doesn't this risk making things worse? If you advertising based on a metric that could lead to that conclusion (even if it isn't your intent), you might feel obligated to geolocate people to avoid being accused of breaching it. The loose wording could also lead to companies trying to exploit loopholes - "we weren't advertising to people suffering a medical emergency, most of whom _aren't_ suffering a medical emergency. We had no reason to suspect _they_ were suffering a medical emergency.". You either need to be stricter (no advertising specifically targeted at hospitals) or specify precisely what it means to "suspect".
  - TheGrumpyBrit 8y ago
    That doesn't seem to help anything. Wouldn't this be better: > Personal data held by a hospital about their patients may not be used for any non-medical purpose, and may not be shared with any third parties unless directly necessary for a medical purpose.
    - pavel_lishin 8y ago
      A user's location, as reported by a phone app, isn't "personal data held by a hospital".

This is the type of digestible quip that will get non-tech people to vote for more regulation. *I’m not advocating for this usage just illustrating a point

by awat 8y ago

This is the type of digestible quip that will get non-tech people to vote for more regulation. *I’m not advocating for this usage just illustrating a point

pavel_lishin 8y ago

I don't see "more regulation" as an inherently negative thing.

awat 8y ago
Neither do I, I don’t want to overstretch but I’ve seen a lot of blowback on GDPR lately and actions like this are what I think will get the US there eventually too.
craftyguy 8y ago
The problem is that folks want either 'no regulation' or 'more regulation'. Neither is the solution. We need regulation that targets specific problems, nothing more and nothing less. Instead we get regulation that may loosely address the problem it was originally drafted to address, but has since grown into a mess of compromises added at the request of lawyers, lobbyists, and uninformed politicians. I'll start: "You cannot send advertising to people when you suspect (e.g. by geofence) they are suffering from a medical emergency."
- stordoff 8y ago
  > "You cannot send advertising to people when you suspect (e.g. by geofence) they are suffering from a medical emergency." Doesn't this risk making things worse? If you advertising based on a metric that could lead to that conclusion (even if it isn't your intent), you might feel obligated to geolocate people to avoid being accused of breaching it. The loose wording could also lead to companies trying to exploit loopholes - "we weren't advertising to people suffering a medical emergency, most of whom _aren't_ suffering a medical emergency. We had no reason to suspect _they_ were suffering a medical emergency.". You either need to be stricter (no advertising specifically targeted at hospitals) or specify precisely what it means to "suspect".
- TheGrumpyBrit 8y ago
  That doesn't seem to help anything. Wouldn't this be better: > Personal data held by a hospital about their patients may not be used for any non-medical purpose, and may not be shared with any third parties unless directly necessary for a medical purpose.
  - pavel_lishin 8y ago
    A user's location, as reported by a phone app, isn't "personal data held by a hospital".