6 ms·

Gdpr is actually a good thing. It's at least weird that USA-based companies must follow it, but the law itself is very good thing for a customer and not that ba

by dzek69 8y ago

Gdpr is actually a good thing. It's at least weird that USA-based companies must follow it, but the law itself is very good thing for a customer and not that bad for companies until they like collecting data and doing dirty stuff with it.

closeparen 8y ago
A fundamental right to remuneration for your creative work that can’t be signed away is in exactly the same spirit as a fundamental right to privacy that can’t be signed away. In both cases you start with a legal protection that’s good and necessary in some cases, declare it a travesty that people are signing away that right en masse against the EU’s opinion of their best interests, and close the door to that sort of contract. In both cases this flies in the face of established internet customs, so you shrug and say “in a society there must be rules, you can’t escape the law just because you’re on the internet and have gotten used to doing it.”
- joejerryronnie 8y ago
  And this is how power hungry people/organizations throughout history have implemented disastrous policies in the interest of the "greater good".
  - ben_w 8y ago
    It’s also how and why pretty much every law in the history of humanity gets written, so singling out only the worst examples doesn’t really say if it is our worst tendency or our best.
- cesarb 8y ago
  > fundamental right to privacy that can’t be signed away If you're talking about the GDPR, from what I understand you can sign your privacy away. What can't be done, is to require you to sign your privacy away as a condition to use some service, unless there's no way to provide that service without using your personal data.
jakeogh 8y ago
"USA-based companies must follow it" US based companies are not subject to EU law. The only reason a US based company might care about the the GDPR is if they have assets in the EU that the EU could seize. Other than that, we will happily ignore the EU's attack(s) on memory. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16965880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16965880
yasp 8y ago
I would have preferred promulgating a set of standards to be GDPR compliant, and allowing companies the option to choose whether to conform. Individuals in turn could choose whether to use GPDR compliant services or not. Rather than hitting all companies globally over the head with a hammer. Eventually this strategy of legislative aggression is going to blow up in the EU's face.
- sandworm101 8y ago
  That's the argument for why health codes should be optional, that customers can choose whether or nor to eat in dirty restaurants and the market will settle the issue. Nope. I don't want to play that game. I want everyone to obey a mandatory set of minimum rules. It's about information imbalance. Without mandatory minimums it is too easy for businesses to hide faults from consumers. I don't want websites to use business judgment when deciding whether to protect consumer privacy. I want them to fear massive retaliatory fines should they not do the bare minimum necessary to protect the public from harm.
  - frockington 8y ago
    "I want them to fear massive retaliatory fines " is exactly why America/Asia is currently dominating Europe in technology. No start up and innovation can happen in such an outwardly hostile business environment
    - yifanl 8y ago
      No startup or innovation should happen at the cost of harming the userbase.
      - yasp 8y ago
        Ultimately it comes down to whether a user should be free to choose whether to use such a service. Ostensibly the user is receiving some benefit despite this "harm". If the harm outweighed the benefit there would be no user.
      - 8y ago

by dzek69 8y ago

closeparen 8y ago

A fundamental right to remuneration for your creative work that can’t be signed away is in exactly the same spirit as a fundamental right to privacy that can’t be signed away. In both cases you start with a legal protection that’s good and necessary in some cases, declare it a travesty that people are signing away that right en masse against the EU’s opinion of their best interests, and close the door to that sort of contract. In both cases this flies in the face of established internet customs, so you shrug and say “in a society there must be rules, you can’t escape the law just because you’re on the internet and have gotten used to doing it.”

joejerryronnie 8y ago
And this is how power hungry people/organizations throughout history have implemented disastrous policies in the interest of the "greater good".
- ben_w 8y ago
  It’s also how and why pretty much every law in the history of humanity gets written, so singling out only the worst examples doesn’t really say if it is our worst tendency or our best.
cesarb 8y ago
> fundamental right to privacy that can’t be signed away If you're talking about the GDPR, from what I understand you can sign your privacy away. What can't be done, is to require you to sign your privacy away as a condition to use some service, unless there's no way to provide that service without using your personal data.

jakeogh 8y ago

"USA-based companies must follow it" US based companies are not subject to EU law. The only reason a US based company might care about the the GDPR is if they have assets in the EU that the EU could seize. Other than that, we will happily ignore the EU's attack(s) on memory. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16965880 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16965880

yasp 8y ago

I would have preferred promulgating a set of standards to be GDPR compliant, and allowing companies the option to choose whether to conform. Individuals in turn could choose whether to use GPDR compliant services or not. Rather than hitting all companies globally over the head with a hammer. Eventually this strategy of legislative aggression is going to blow up in the EU's face.

sandworm101 8y ago
That's the argument for why health codes should be optional, that customers can choose whether or nor to eat in dirty restaurants and the market will settle the issue. Nope. I don't want to play that game. I want everyone to obey a mandatory set of minimum rules. It's about information imbalance. Without mandatory minimums it is too easy for businesses to hide faults from consumers. I don't want websites to use business judgment when deciding whether to protect consumer privacy. I want them to fear massive retaliatory fines should they not do the bare minimum necessary to protect the public from harm.
- frockington 8y ago
  "I want them to fear massive retaliatory fines " is exactly why America/Asia is currently dominating Europe in technology. No start up and innovation can happen in such an outwardly hostile business environment
  - yifanl 8y ago
    No startup or innovation should happen at the cost of harming the userbase.
    - yasp 8y ago
      Ultimately it comes down to whether a user should be free to choose whether to use such a service. Ostensibly the user is receiving some benefit despite this "harm". If the harm outweighed the benefit there would be no user.
    - 8y ago