4 ms·

GDPR as a positive example? Huh?

by arcbyte 8y ago

jimnotgym 8y ago
For a person it is a really great law yes. For a data-farming corporation, less so, but that is not what he OP asked
- paxy 8y ago
  Large data-farming corporations can and will continue operating in Europe, since they are the only ones that have the resources to understand the law, find limits and loopholes, pay fines, make major changes to their systems etc. Smaller companies and startups are the ones who will suffer.
  - gpvos 8y ago
    Only if they want to data farm. And while there are probably loopholes, I'd be interested to hear of any.
- darawk 8y ago
  As far as I can tell the only impact GDPR has had on my life is that there are a lot more annoying popups for me to mindlessly click 'accept' on.
  - StavrosK 8y ago
    Really? Then you aren't using it at all. The impact it's had on my life is that companies have to tell me what they're doing with my data. If I say no, they have to refrain from using it, they can't just say "well tough luck, we have it now". If I give my email for a contest, they can't keep spamming me with crap. If I tell them to forget I exist, they have to do it. If I want to see what Facebook knows about me, it has to tell me everything. As someone who runs dozens of side-projects with thousands of users, I didn't even have to change anything. All it took was to not be shitty to begin with.
    - darawk 8y ago
      > The impact it's had on my life is that companies have to tell me what they're doing with my data Have you learned anything interesting from that? > If I say no, they have to refrain from using it, they can't just say "well tough luck, we have it now". Have you been doing that? > If I give my email for a contest, they can't keep spamming me with crap. That was already a thing in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003 > If I tell them to forget I exist, they have to do it. That could be useful, I suppose. Although to be honest, it's likely to be used to erase bad behavior that we'd rather have public much more than any legitimate privacy concern, i'd guess.
      - StavrosK 8y ago
        > Have you learned anything interesting from that? No, the few I asked turned out to have as much data as I shared, which is almost nothing. > Have you been doing that? Yep. > That was already a thing in the US: Good to know. > it's likely to be used to erase bad behavior that we'd rather have public much more than any legitimate privacy concern, i'd guess. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I also don't agree that people's bad behaviour should remain public forever.
    - erik_seaberg 8y ago
      The law is not merely a list of bad things you can't do. Many of its 99 sections require new bureaucratic procedures like "hire a data protection officer to write an impact assessment and wait eight to fourteen weeks for an official response" that you almost certainly weren't already doing.
      - ric2b 8y ago
        > new bureaucratic procedures like "hire a data protection officer Not "hire", "designate". The data protection officer is just a role that someone in the company takes on, it does't have to be their only role.
- Aunche 8y ago
  Does it really help the regular person? I've yet to hear an example of a real world problem that GDPR could have prevented.
  - pluma 8y ago
    Cambridge Analytica would have blatantly violated the GDPR, so there's that.
- kodablah 8y ago
  All corporations that spent money on compliance, their customers, their employees, etc. It's becoming very annoying to see proponents of the legislation act like it only impacts one type of tech company. That is willful ignorance. Oh, and I understand that some don't realize it, but some of us out here running and working for companies affected by these rulings are people too. I wish everyone would stop pretending who they hoped would be affected and see who actually are so we can move from politics to reality.
- MistahKoala 8y ago
  Individuals who run their own business are far more vulnerable to the harm form GDPR than well-resourced enterprises are. And as an individual consumer, I'm comfortable in saying that it is a really not great law for me (ie, YMMV). It's impeded some of the content I access and for many sites it's like having cookie notices on steroids. It's a pain in the arse.
sabarn01 8y ago
GDPR is a boon to large tech. The more complicated the compliance the bigger the advantage for large firms.
gpvos 8y ago
Yes, it's actually pretty sane as laws go, and does a reasonable job protecting people's privacy.

GDPR as a positive example? Huh?

jimnotgym 8y ago

For a person it is a really great law yes. For a data-farming corporation, less so, but that is not what he OP asked

paxy 8y ago
Large data-farming corporations can and will continue operating in Europe, since they are the only ones that have the resources to understand the law, find limits and loopholes, pay fines, make major changes to their systems etc. Smaller companies and startups are the ones who will suffer.
- gpvos 8y ago
  Only if they want to data farm. And while there are probably loopholes, I'd be interested to hear of any.
darawk 8y ago
As far as I can tell the only impact GDPR has had on my life is that there are a lot more annoying popups for me to mindlessly click 'accept' on.
- StavrosK 8y ago
  Really? Then you aren't using it at all. The impact it's had on my life is that companies have to tell me what they're doing with my data. If I say no, they have to refrain from using it, they can't just say "well tough luck, we have it now". If I give my email for a contest, they can't keep spamming me with crap. If I tell them to forget I exist, they have to do it. If I want to see what Facebook knows about me, it has to tell me everything. As someone who runs dozens of side-projects with thousands of users, I didn't even have to change anything. All it took was to not be shitty to begin with.
  - darawk 8y ago
    > The impact it's had on my life is that companies have to tell me what they're doing with my data Have you learned anything interesting from that? > If I say no, they have to refrain from using it, they can't just say "well tough luck, we have it now". Have you been doing that? > If I give my email for a contest, they can't keep spamming me with crap. That was already a thing in the US: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CAN-SPAM_Act_of_2003 > If I tell them to forget I exist, they have to do it. That could be useful, I suppose. Although to be honest, it's likely to be used to erase bad behavior that we'd rather have public much more than any legitimate privacy concern, i'd guess.
    - StavrosK 8y ago
      > Have you learned anything interesting from that? No, the few I asked turned out to have as much data as I shared, which is almost nothing. > Have you been doing that? Yep. > That was already a thing in the US: Good to know. > it's likely to be used to erase bad behavior that we'd rather have public much more than any legitimate privacy concern, i'd guess. I'm not sure I agree with that, but I also don't agree that people's bad behaviour should remain public forever.
  - erik_seaberg 8y ago
    The law is not merely a list of bad things you can't do. Many of its 99 sections require new bureaucratic procedures like "hire a data protection officer to write an impact assessment and wait eight to fourteen weeks for an official response" that you almost certainly weren't already doing.
    - ric2b 8y ago
      > new bureaucratic procedures like "hire a data protection officer Not "hire", "designate". The data protection officer is just a role that someone in the company takes on, it does't have to be their only role.
Aunche 8y ago
Does it really help the regular person? I've yet to hear an example of a real world problem that GDPR could have prevented.
- pluma 8y ago
  Cambridge Analytica would have blatantly violated the GDPR, so there's that.
kodablah 8y ago
All corporations that spent money on compliance, their customers, their employees, etc. It's becoming very annoying to see proponents of the legislation act like it only impacts one type of tech company. That is willful ignorance. Oh, and I understand that some don't realize it, but some of us out here running and working for companies affected by these rulings are people too. I wish everyone would stop pretending who they hoped would be affected and see who actually are so we can move from politics to reality.
MistahKoala 8y ago
Individuals who run their own business are far more vulnerable to the harm form GDPR than well-resourced enterprises are. And as an individual consumer, I'm comfortable in saying that it is a really not great law for me (ie, YMMV). It's impeded some of the content I access and for many sites it's like having cookie notices on steroids. It's a pain in the arse.

sabarn01 8y ago

GDPR is a boon to large tech. The more complicated the compliance the bigger the advantage for large firms.

gpvos 8y ago

Yes, it's actually pretty sane as laws go, and does a reasonable job protecting people's privacy.