5 ms·

Thanks, I feel both valued and safe now. The site says: "Our European visitors are important to us. This site is currently unavailable to visitors from the E

Thanks, I feel both valued and safe now. The site says: "Our European visitors are important to us. This site is currently unavailable to visitors from the European Economic Area while we work to ensure your data is protected in accordance with applicable EU laws."

akie 7y ago
Yeah, it's very disingenuous, what they actually should say is "You can't use our services your government asked us to be considerate about your personal data, and you are not important enough to make that happen"
- weddpros 7y ago
  I should be free to trust whoever I want, but the EU has decided to pass laws that suppress that right. And now I can't learn about a life saving drug because of that law. When you suppress freedom, people pay a price.
  - akie 7y ago
    It's an uneven power relationship that the EU is trying to level, and I'm grateful for that. It has nothing to do with suppressing freedom.
    - jakeogh 7y ago
      https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18863496 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18863496 It's gov regulation on memory and history. Pefect for those unwilling to take responsibility for their actions, or in that case, afraid to do so because their income depends on it. PR firms' dream. Antithetical to a free society. Article 13 rests on the same short sight. Sounds like you would rather they lie to you and just show the page? Surely you cant expect them to spend money on some foreign nation's laws. If so, just wait until China hears about it.
    - krageon 7y ago
      As (perhaps) obvious as this argument is, you will find a large part of US-based commenters claiming freedom-related limitations wilfully ignores skewed power relationships (or deny that they exist). Given that premise, what you see is not a view that will be shared by them.
      - Jamwinner 7y ago
        We mostly accept power imbalances as a trade-off for more personal choice, and (often erroniously) assume they are temporary and teansient. Its obviously, not always optimal. But the whole "Those who would trade their freedom for security deserve neither" thing runs deep. I can't say I totally disagree, although our implementation clearly needs some work.
        krageon 7y ago
        As with all rules, the trouble pops up when it's taken to extreme.
  - EliRivers 7y ago
    I should be free to trust whoever I want, but the EU has decided to pass laws that suppress that right. Does the US have no laws that regulate how people should interact with each other? Rhetorical question. Of course it does. So do you complain about that as well, or is it just the EU protection laws you dislike?
  - lagadu 7y ago
    You must hate how supermarkets and restaurants have to comply with those pesky health standards.
    - jakeogh 7y ago
      False equivalence. Markets are subject to the health standards in their juristiction. The EU does not rule the world.
      - MuricaFYeah 7y ago
        > The EU does not rule the world You forgot to add: "That's our job! Arrrrr! Flags! Bullets! Eagles!"
      - Retric 7y ago
        These rules only apply to the EU, they are free to display different websites to different users. In fact that’s actually what they did.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  Alternatively: "there's so few of you that the cost of adding yet another set of laws to our compliance routine is greater than the revenue you'd generate". Online publishing is low margin and this appears to be a local news station so it probably does make sense from a strict business perspective. I wouldn't be surprised if they're outsourcing compliance auditing and GDPR is a check box that cost money so they just chose to block instead. You don't need to assume questionable ethics when there's a perfectly ethical business case. Sure it would be nice if online news wasn't monetized with our data but that's not the world we live in you can't blame a local news station for not trying to be the ones to challenge the status quo.
- big_chungus 7y ago
  Not exactly. It's an American company not trying to go to market in the EU; why would it invest in legal compliance with European regs? Even were the company to not store any data, there are lots of compliance steps which companies must take to _prove_ they are operating within the law. In these circumstances, it doesn't make sense to work on European compliance.
  - oliwarner 7y ago
    You've missed the point. If they've no interest in going "to market" in the EU, why lie about European visitors being valued? What you've said isn't inaccurate, it's just not relevant to the message that Europeans are shown.
strictfp 7y ago
I just wanted to reply "Thank you George".
jsty 7y ago
If you still want to read, outline works fine: https://outline.com/KA3LDn https://outline.com/KA3LDn
danielbarla 7y ago
To be honest, I prefer this over the non GDRP-compliant "by the way, we're tracking you, cool?" notices that most sites seem to think is okay these days. Both lead to the site being immediately closed, but at least with the former I didn't "implicitly agree" to anything.
kriro 7y ago
I'm generally not a fan of the EU (or bureaucracies in general) but it seems that with regards to digital legislation and rulings they tend to at least work with good intentions (at least imo). One can argue about the implementation but I generally applaud any afford towards more privacy. They get some credit from me because I consider the lack of software patents (with minor exceptions) one of the biggest European triumphs in recent history.
hhas01 7y ago
Link to article on a GDPR-compliant site: https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2019/11/08/maryland-medical-company-claims-to-have-hiv-aids-cure/ https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2019/11/08/maryland-medical-c...

akie 7y ago

Yeah, it's very disingenuous, what they actually should say is "You can't use our services your government asked us to be considerate about your personal data, and you are not important enough to make that happen"

weddpros 7y ago
I should be free to trust whoever I want, but the EU has decided to pass laws that suppress that right. And now I can't learn about a life saving drug because of that law. When you suppress freedom, people pay a price.
- akie 7y ago
  It's an uneven power relationship that the EU is trying to level, and I'm grateful for that. It has nothing to do with suppressing freedom.
  - jakeogh 7y ago
    https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18863496 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=18863496 It's gov regulation on memory and history. Pefect for those unwilling to take responsibility for their actions, or in that case, afraid to do so because their income depends on it. PR firms' dream. Antithetical to a free society. Article 13 rests on the same short sight. Sounds like you would rather they lie to you and just show the page? Surely you cant expect them to spend money on some foreign nation's laws. If so, just wait until China hears about it.
  - krageon 7y ago
    As (perhaps) obvious as this argument is, you will find a large part of US-based commenters claiming freedom-related limitations wilfully ignores skewed power relationships (or deny that they exist). Given that premise, what you see is not a view that will be shared by them.
    - Jamwinner 7y ago
      We mostly accept power imbalances as a trade-off for more personal choice, and (often erroniously) assume they are temporary and teansient. Its obviously, not always optimal. But the whole "Those who would trade their freedom for security deserve neither" thing runs deep. I can't say I totally disagree, although our implementation clearly needs some work.
      - krageon 7y ago
        As with all rules, the trouble pops up when it's taken to extreme.
- EliRivers 7y ago
  I should be free to trust whoever I want, but the EU has decided to pass laws that suppress that right. Does the US have no laws that regulate how people should interact with each other? Rhetorical question. Of course it does. So do you complain about that as well, or is it just the EU protection laws you dislike?
- lagadu 7y ago
  You must hate how supermarkets and restaurants have to comply with those pesky health standards.
  - jakeogh 7y ago
    False equivalence. Markets are subject to the health standards in their juristiction. The EU does not rule the world.
    - MuricaFYeah 7y ago
      > The EU does not rule the world You forgot to add: "That's our job! Arrrrr! Flags! Bullets! Eagles!"
    - Retric 7y ago
      These rules only apply to the EU, they are free to display different websites to different users. In fact that’s actually what they did.
dsfyu404ed 7y ago
Alternatively: "there's so few of you that the cost of adding yet another set of laws to our compliance routine is greater than the revenue you'd generate". Online publishing is low margin and this appears to be a local news station so it probably does make sense from a strict business perspective. I wouldn't be surprised if they're outsourcing compliance auditing and GDPR is a check box that cost money so they just chose to block instead. You don't need to assume questionable ethics when there's a perfectly ethical business case. Sure it would be nice if online news wasn't monetized with our data but that's not the world we live in you can't blame a local news station for not trying to be the ones to challenge the status quo.
big_chungus 7y ago
Not exactly. It's an American company not trying to go to market in the EU; why would it invest in legal compliance with European regs? Even were the company to not store any data, there are lots of compliance steps which companies must take to _prove_ they are operating within the law. In these circumstances, it doesn't make sense to work on European compliance.
- oliwarner 7y ago
  You've missed the point. If they've no interest in going "to market" in the EU, why lie about European visitors being valued? What you've said isn't inaccurate, it's just not relevant to the message that Europeans are shown.

strictfp 7y ago

I just wanted to reply "Thank you George".

jsty 7y ago

If you still want to read, outline works fine: https://outline.com/KA3LDn https://outline.com/KA3LDn

danielbarla 7y ago

To be honest, I prefer this over the non GDRP-compliant "by the way, we're tracking you, cool?" notices that most sites seem to think is okay these days. Both lead to the site being immediately closed, but at least with the former I didn't "implicitly agree" to anything.

kriro 7y ago

I'm generally not a fan of the EU (or bureaucracies in general) but it seems that with regards to digital legislation and rulings they tend to at least work with good intentions (at least imo). One can argue about the implementation but I generally applaud any afford towards more privacy. They get some credit from me because I consider the lack of software patents (with minor exceptions) one of the biggest European triumphs in recent history.

hhas01 7y ago

Link to article on a GDPR-compliant site: https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2019/11/08/maryland-medical-company-claims-to-have-hiv-aids-cure/ https://baltimore.cbslocal.com/2019/11/08/maryland-medical-c...