4 ms·

The effective result of GDPR has been less than ideal, but was a step in the right direction. Abolishing it entirely in favor of a vacuum would carry a more wei

The effective result of GDPR has been less than ideal, but was a step in the right direction. Abolishing it entirely in favor of a vacuum would carry a more weighty cost.

mrandish 4y ago
The frustrating part is that the unintended consequences of GDPR were inevitable and clearly foreseeable, yet it was passed into law anyway and now it's incredibly difficult (if not practically impossible) to fix through iterative adjustment. It often seems like politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of seeing the myriad ways their well-intended rules will fail in the real-world. Maybe all legislation should first have to pass an "Unintended Consequences Analysis" review. Meanwhile, GDPR is yet another disruptive annoyance to users, a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams and isn't delivering the benefits promised.
- powerhour 4y ago
  It doesn't have to be disruptive to users, companies go out of their way to make it disruptive. As others here have said, companies can just stop adding code to track users and stop storing so much information. It's actually way less work.
  - babypuncher 4y ago
    But why blame the companies who are directly responsible for this annoyance when we can blame the government who is indirectly responsible?
  - Innominate 4y ago
    The GDPR covers tracking of users, but is much more broad in scope. Simply not tracking users doesn't stop the GDPR from applying. The GDPR provides a framework by which bad actors can do their thing legally without too much trouble. To a good actor, who only stores the data they actually need and doesn't track users, the GDPR still applies and is just as big a pain in the ass.
    - LordDragonfang 4y ago
      Legitimate interest is excluded from the GDPR, so what kind of "good actors" are you describing that are hobbled by the GDPR? Be specific, please.
      - tzs 4y ago
        Anyone who doesn't want to deal with the hassle of hiring someone in the Union as their Article 27 representative.
- simion314 4y ago
  >Meanwhile, GDPR is yet another disruptive annoyance to users, a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams and isn't delivering the benefits promised. Users can now demand we delete their account and data and we have to do it, this is some work for us but it is good for users. Also do you forget that popups were a thing before GDPR? Modal for you to subscribe to some shit,monthly Terms of Service changes, notifications to see what new feature was added, to see what new stuff some contact posted were a thing, with GDPR you get a one time popup , you make your choice and you should be done. In summary Pros for users: - transparency, you now know about the 100+ partners and you can decide - you can ask for your data and ask for it to be deleted - you will get notified if your private data is lost(mioght be adifferent law for security breaches) Cons: - Shit websites use dark patterns and annoy you with a popup one time No Pros for developers, companies: Cons for devs and companies: - you need to research the law and find ways to screw the user with dark patterns - you need to update some old project and remove tracking or implement some popup , implement account deletion, data demands etc - you need to update your ToS documents, privacy policies - almost never happens, you remove tracking or configure your ad script to don't track and you don't store private data. From what I see users EU ones) have a lot to win, I assume if you are not in EU seeing the popup is a bug and would be fix .
- babypuncher 4y ago
  > a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams It's only a burden on these people if they choose to be user-hostile. There are really easy ways to deal with GDPR but these dumb companies insist on avoiding those solutions at all cost. If companies insist on being dicks, then the only possible government-level solution might be to just ban this kind of tracking outright.

The effective result of GDPR has been less than ideal, but was a step in the right direction. Abolishing it entirely in favor of a vacuum would carry a more weighty cost.

mrandish 4y ago

The frustrating part is that the unintended consequences of GDPR were inevitable and clearly foreseeable, yet it was passed into law anyway and now it's incredibly difficult (if not practically impossible) to fix through iterative adjustment. It often seems like politicians and bureaucrats are incapable of seeing the myriad ways their well-intended rules will fail in the real-world. Maybe all legislation should first have to pass an "Unintended Consequences Analysis" review. Meanwhile, GDPR is yet another disruptive annoyance to users, a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams and isn't delivering the benefits promised.

powerhour 4y ago
It doesn't have to be disruptive to users, companies go out of their way to make it disruptive. As others here have said, companies can just stop adding code to track users and stop storing so much information. It's actually way less work.
- babypuncher 4y ago
  But why blame the companies who are directly responsible for this annoyance when we can blame the government who is indirectly responsible?
- Innominate 4y ago
  The GDPR covers tracking of users, but is much more broad in scope. Simply not tracking users doesn't stop the GDPR from applying. The GDPR provides a framework by which bad actors can do their thing legally without too much trouble. To a good actor, who only stores the data they actually need and doesn't track users, the GDPR still applies and is just as big a pain in the ass.
  - LordDragonfang 4y ago
    Legitimate interest is excluded from the GDPR, so what kind of "good actors" are you describing that are hobbled by the GDPR? Be specific, please.
    - tzs 4y ago
      Anyone who doesn't want to deal with the hassle of hiring someone in the Union as their Article 27 representative.
simion314 4y ago
>Meanwhile, GDPR is yet another disruptive annoyance to users, a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams and isn't delivering the benefits promised. Users can now demand we delete their account and data and we have to do it, this is some work for us but it is good for users. Also do you forget that popups were a thing before GDPR? Modal for you to subscribe to some shit,monthly Terms of Service changes, notifications to see what new feature was added, to see what new stuff some contact posted were a thing, with GDPR you get a one time popup , you make your choice and you should be done. In summary Pros for users: - transparency, you now know about the 100+ partners and you can decide - you can ask for your data and ask for it to be deleted - you will get notified if your private data is lost(mioght be adifferent law for security breaches) Cons: - Shit websites use dark patterns and annoy you with a popup one time No Pros for developers, companies: Cons for devs and companies: - you need to research the law and find ways to screw the user with dark patterns - you need to update some old project and remove tracking or implement some popup , implement account deletion, data demands etc - you need to update your ToS documents, privacy policies - almost never happens, you remove tracking or configure your ad script to don't track and you don't store private data. From what I see users EU ones) have a lot to win, I assume if you are not in EU seeing the popup is a bug and would be fix .
babypuncher 4y ago
> a burden on overworked, under-funded website teams It's only a burden on these people if they choose to be user-hostile. There are really easy ways to deal with GDPR but these dumb companies insist on avoiding those solutions at all cost. If companies insist on being dicks, then the only possible government-level solution might be to just ban this kind of tracking outright.