3 ms·

I don't think so. The law can simply ban it but they know it'll break things. So they opt for the most annoying alternative. This reminds me of California prop

by gerash 5y ago

I don't think so. The law can simply ban it but they know it'll break things. So they opt for the most annoying alternative. This reminds me of California prop 65 which is as useless if not more than the cookie law. You see it at every random place with the note that "this product may contain a chemical known to the state of California to cause cancer or birth defects ..." People have become fully desensitized to it because it shows up at the parking garage of their work place. If it was a real deal well perhaps it should've been banned. I'd like to repeal both prop 65 and these cookie laws. Either ban something or fine the perpetrators if it's harmful or stfu /rant

mindslight 5y ago
The laws recognize that there are legitimate reasons for processing personal information - banking, medical records, utility bills, etc. I personally wouldn't mind living in a world where use of personal information for all of those activities were outright banned, but it's understandable that the law would attempt to make carve outs for them. The actual problem is the inability to update the law as companies iterate on their malicious compliance. And ascribing the bad faith actions of companies as consequences of government helps erode the political will required to enact sane updates. The prop 65 issue is somewhat orthogonal as it's the result of an impossible ask by California's citizen initiative process. Ideally that too would have been updated as its failings became apparent.
kevin_thibedeau 5y ago
Have you ever smelled a Harbor Freight store before prop 65 and after? The difference is night and day.
- tacocataco 5y ago
  I don't often go to harbor freight. What was the difference?
  - mindslight 5y ago
    Presumably it smells a lot less due to lower volatile organic compounds, although I don't have firsthand experience with the ones in CA. Although aren't VOC limits a separate regulatory push, apart from Prop 65? As an aside, I do have some experience with California paints and they're terrible. I'd much rather have a day or two of leaving the windows open after painting, than to have paint that never really dries and releases low level VOCs for a month.

by gerash 5y ago

mindslight 5y ago

The laws recognize that there are legitimate reasons for processing personal information - banking, medical records, utility bills, etc. I personally wouldn't mind living in a world where use of personal information for all of those activities were outright banned, but it's understandable that the law would attempt to make carve outs for them. The actual problem is the inability to update the law as companies iterate on their malicious compliance. And ascribing the bad faith actions of companies as consequences of government helps erode the political will required to enact sane updates. The prop 65 issue is somewhat orthogonal as it's the result of an impossible ask by California's citizen initiative process. Ideally that too would have been updated as its failings became apparent.

kevin_thibedeau 5y ago

Have you ever smelled a Harbor Freight store before prop 65 and after? The difference is night and day.

tacocataco 5y ago
I don't often go to harbor freight. What was the difference?
- mindslight 5y ago
  Presumably it smells a lot less due to lower volatile organic compounds, although I don't have firsthand experience with the ones in CA. Although aren't VOC limits a separate regulatory push, apart from Prop 65? As an aside, I do have some experience with California paints and they're terrible. I'd much rather have a day or two of leaving the windows open after painting, than to have paint that never really dries and releases low level VOCs for a month.