3 ms·
This is such a silly POV. Enforcing too much specifics into law is how you end up with non-nonsensical actions that are done just to comply with a law, like int
by mifreewil 8y ago
This is such a silly POV. Enforcing too much specifics into law is how you end up with non-nonsensical actions that are done just to comply with a law, like intrusive cookie banners on every single website. This law seems to actually be well written, other than it doesn't seem to specify any penalties for non-compliance, at least from the part of the law shown in the article.
It's clear what the end goal of the law is, and gives several broad, reasonable ways to comply with the law. Century link is the ISP/tech experts here - they are the morons who chose to do DNS hihacking when they could have just as easily sent out an email or added a notice to the bill for the month.
- eitland 8y ago> Enforcing too much specifics into law is how you end up with non-nonsensical actions that are done just to comply with a law, like intrusive cookie banners on every single website. The cookie banners are probably a bad example: they were made to take advantage of a loophole in the first "cookie law". I think the intention of the first cookie law was clear as well, it just wasn't clear enough.