7 ms·

Is there any evidence of GDPR having the desired effect for which it was put in place? Is citizens' data being protected more than before? The second-order eff

Is there any evidence of GDPR having the desired effect for which it was put in place? Is citizens' data being protected more than before? The second-order effects that everyone predicted are already happening (big tech companies change nothing significant, many small companies shutting down). The long-term and unforseen second-order effects have yet to bear fruit, as far as I know (please let me know if you've seen anything).

louhike 8y ago
It's just my personal anecdote, but I'm happy to be able to choose which cookies can be used. And when I see the changes the companies I worked with and the comany in which I work had to make, I think it's a good thing. People are more cautious with how they use the data of users now.
Brotkrumen 8y ago
Yes, the amount of tracking cookies is declining. https://www.techradar.com/news/gdpr-sees-cookies-crumble-on-eu-news-sites https://www.techradar.com/news/gdpr-sees-cookies-crumble-on-... The shutting down of companies is a desired effect, because those are the companies that won't get consent. Data resellers for example that dont provide any advantage tto the user. We haven't even seen the actual effects yet because google Facebook et al are probably in violation and are waiting to be sued to fight it out in courts
yardstick 8y ago
One nasty side effect is some large organisations are shutting out Europe. I can no longer access severs popular US based sites and instead get messages about the content not being available in your region. (Most recently: latimes.con and fox8.com)
- Cthulhu_ 8y ago
  That's also fine - was their content worth your privacy? If they can't be GDPR compliant we don't want them.
  - Jyaif 8y ago
    > was their content worth your privacy? What privacy was I losing?
    - pmontra 8y ago
      First one that comes to my mind: their advertisers knowing you're on those sites, which page you read, when, for how long, etc. This is mitigated by running an Adblocker and a selective Javascript disabling extension like uMatrix or NoScript, but it would be much better if those sites would let their readers decide if they want to be tracked or not. Anyway, I'm also blocked on those sites but the same news on LA Times and Fox appear on countless other sites. I'm not losing anything, they're not wasting power and bandwidth for a freeloader. Win/win.
      - mike22223333 8y ago
        If you agree to pay $10 a month per paper, then you could have it. But majority of people have proven that they will not pay, hence it does not justify to have a paid subscription system without ads. When more and more people block ads, there will only be a few large sites remaining on the internet because the rest will not be able to survive in the most likely scenario. You could cry all about your freedom then.
        pmontra 8y ago
        It that ever happens I can go back buying newspapers as I did before they moved on the Internet. I bet some of them will always be free, but if only a few of them will be we should be very careful about what we read.
  - rdlecler1 8y ago
    Maybe you don’t but can you speak for everyone? The poster seemed to think that was undesirable.
    - anoncake 8y ago
wongarsu 8y ago
One positive effect you can already see: people think about privacy laws. Most of the GDPR was already law in various EU countries, just largely ignored by everybody. GDPR gave the laws more teeth and publicity. For real improvements, we will have to wait a few years to find out what and who regulators will persue for violations, and how the courts interpret the GDPR. If regulators never look at small companies, the second order effects on small companies will vanish. If regulators miss to successfully prosecute the obvious violations by tech giants, no meaningful effects will stay at all. It all comes down to what regulators will do, and it's way too early to tell.
thefounder 8y ago
More companies go public when they get hacked
nwellnhof 8y ago
The GDPR isn't only about the Internet economy. It affects offline businesses as well. You start to notice things like a plumbing company asking for consent to use your contact data on a paper form. The fact that people think a lot more about data protection and privacy is a good thing in itself.
stordoff 8y ago
It's led to one company I use supporting (and forcing) HTTPS. They should have been doing it before, but it's still a win. They've also stopped asking for addresses, and are removing existing addresses: > To reduce the amount of personal data we process for you, we have stopped asking for address, city, state and zip code in our shop (we do not ship physical goods anyway). Also, we are in the process of removing all existing address information from our customer database.
cribbles 8y ago
One effect I haven't seen mentioned yet is that EU data subjects can permanently delete their Facebook accounts, along with all associated data. (Previously you could only indefinitely 'deactivate'.)

louhike 8y ago

It's just my personal anecdote, but I'm happy to be able to choose which cookies can be used. And when I see the changes the companies I worked with and the comany in which I work had to make, I think it's a good thing. People are more cautious with how they use the data of users now.

Brotkrumen 8y ago

Yes, the amount of tracking cookies is declining. https://www.techradar.com/news/gdpr-sees-cookies-crumble-on-eu-news-sites https://www.techradar.com/news/gdpr-sees-cookies-crumble-on-... The shutting down of companies is a desired effect, because those are the companies that won't get consent. Data resellers for example that dont provide any advantage tto the user. We haven't even seen the actual effects yet because google Facebook et al are probably in violation and are waiting to be sued to fight it out in courts

yardstick 8y ago

One nasty side effect is some large organisations are shutting out Europe. I can no longer access severs popular US based sites and instead get messages about the content not being available in your region. (Most recently: latimes.con and fox8.com)

Cthulhu_ 8y ago
That's also fine - was their content worth your privacy? If they can't be GDPR compliant we don't want them.
- Jyaif 8y ago
  > was their content worth your privacy? What privacy was I losing?
  - pmontra 8y ago
    First one that comes to my mind: their advertisers knowing you're on those sites, which page you read, when, for how long, etc. This is mitigated by running an Adblocker and a selective Javascript disabling extension like uMatrix or NoScript, but it would be much better if those sites would let their readers decide if they want to be tracked or not. Anyway, I'm also blocked on those sites but the same news on LA Times and Fox appear on countless other sites. I'm not losing anything, they're not wasting power and bandwidth for a freeloader. Win/win.
    - mike22223333 8y ago
      If you agree to pay $10 a month per paper, then you could have it. But majority of people have proven that they will not pay, hence it does not justify to have a paid subscription system without ads. When more and more people block ads, there will only be a few large sites remaining on the internet because the rest will not be able to survive in the most likely scenario. You could cry all about your freedom then.
      - pmontra 8y ago
        It that ever happens I can go back buying newspapers as I did before they moved on the Internet. I bet some of them will always be free, but if only a few of them will be we should be very careful about what we read.
- rdlecler1 8y ago
  Maybe you don’t but can you speak for everyone? The poster seemed to think that was undesirable.
  - anoncake 8y ago

wongarsu 8y ago

One positive effect you can already see: people think about privacy laws. Most of the GDPR was already law in various EU countries, just largely ignored by everybody. GDPR gave the laws more teeth and publicity. For real improvements, we will have to wait a few years to find out what and who regulators will persue for violations, and how the courts interpret the GDPR. If regulators never look at small companies, the second order effects on small companies will vanish. If regulators miss to successfully prosecute the obvious violations by tech giants, no meaningful effects will stay at all. It all comes down to what regulators will do, and it's way too early to tell.

thefounder 8y ago

More companies go public when they get hacked

nwellnhof 8y ago

The GDPR isn't only about the Internet economy. It affects offline businesses as well. You start to notice things like a plumbing company asking for consent to use your contact data on a paper form. The fact that people think a lot more about data protection and privacy is a good thing in itself.

stordoff 8y ago

It's led to one company I use supporting (and forcing) HTTPS. They should have been doing it before, but it's still a win. They've also stopped asking for addresses, and are removing existing addresses: > To reduce the amount of personal data we process for you, we have stopped asking for address, city, state and zip code in our shop (we do not ship physical goods anyway). Also, we are in the process of removing all existing address information from our customer database.

cribbles 8y ago

One effect I haven't seen mentioned yet is that EU data subjects can permanently delete their Facebook accounts, along with all associated data. (Previously you could only indefinitely 'deactivate'.)