8 ms·

It's not clear that ADPPA will move forward. The current version preempts California's CCPA/CPRA legislation, and (big surprise) California doesn't like that. B

by jdp23 4y ago

It's not clear that ADPPA will move forward. The current version preempts California's CCPA/CPRA legislation, and (big surprise) California doesn't like that. But, that's far from the only issue with it. Here's an update from a couple of weeks ago which discusses some of the problems, as well as potential next steps. https://thenexusofprivacy.net/adppa-new-compromise/ https://thenexusofprivacy.net/adppa-new-compromise/ And, here's EFF's position: " Americans Deserve More Than The Current American Data Privacy Protection Act" https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/americans-deserve-more-current-american-data-privacy-protection-act https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/07/americans-deserve-more...

nugget 4y ago
Preemption would be an enormous mistake. Federal legislation moves at a glacial pace. In a field like privacy, you may only get to pass one substantial bill every 10 or 15 years. Technology moves too quickly for lawmakers at the Federal level to keep up. States can move much faster. Justice Brandeis popularized the phrase that "[the] states are the laboratories of democracy" and digital privacy law is a text book case of an emerging field that will benefit enormously from iterative experimentation at the state level.
- yonaguska 4y ago
  Yep, I personally only want federal pre-emption for restrictions on government. Shall not infringe type stuff.
- rt4mn 4y ago
  This is exactly why Microsoft has been throwing money at lobbyists at the state level as well, pushing shitty "consumer privacy bills", both because they don't like strong legal privacy rights at the state level, but also in the hopes of forestalling and kneecapping a strong federal baseline privacy bill. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/tech-lobbyists-are-pushing-bad-privacy-bills-washington-state-can-and-must-do https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/tech-lobbyists-are-pus...
  - jdp23 4y ago
    Yep. We've fought them off here in Washington ... but they and Amazon just took it to other, more pliable states. Todd Feathers and Albert Ng had a very good article on this in The Markup a few months ago https://themarkup.org/privacy/2022/05/26/tech-industry-groups-are-watering-down-attempts-at-privacy-regulation-one-state-at-a-time https://themarkup.org/privacy/2022/05/26/tech-industry-group...
    - encryptluks2 4y ago
      Did we though? What bills does Washington have that could compare to the CCPA?
      - jdp23 4y ago
        None yet. Big tech companies have pushed various versions of the Bad Washington Privacy Act, which is weaker than CCPA. In 2021 and 2022, civil liberties, civil rights, and immigrant rights groups have supported the People's Privacy Act, which is a lot stronger than CCPA or ADPPA, but tech lobbying kept it from even getting a hearing. We'll see what happens in 2023 ... the Bad Washington Privacy Act's sponsor is retiring from the Senate (and is generally expected to become a full-time lobbyist), so the landscape should be different.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago
  > Preemption would be an enormous mistake It creates a national standard. If we’re still debating the solution, sure, devolve to states. But if we’re near consensus, preëmption provides scale. This is American strength in a nutshell.
  - autoexec 4y ago
    Yeah, nobody wants to have to constantly worry about compliance with 50+ different required standards which may or may not conflict with one another. Having one clear standard for services to follow is absolutely preferred so long as it actually does the job of protecting people's data privacy.
- phpisthebest 4y ago
  >>Preemption would be an enormous mistake Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything, without even touching the fact that Data privacy is in no way even close to any of the enumerated power of the US Federal Government Federal Laws almost always favor large companies, the exact companies these laws are needed to protect the consumer from Facebook, Microsoft, etc would love nothing more than to have the federal government take over because has "stake holders" they will be called on to write their own legislation, and will start the revolving door of hiring current, former and future regulators to work in the very corporations they are supposed to regulate. Federal laws never work for the average citizen
  - hprotagonist 4y ago
    > Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything So that my marriage is recognized across state lines, for a start.
    - klabb3 4y ago
      Why would you the government to be involved in your marriage?
      - d4mi3n 4y ago
        I think the point GP is trying to make is that sometimes state governments try to get involved in marriage and having a federal policy that preempts that can prevent further meddling. This cuts both ways—with preemption, you can provide baseline rights or guarantees to citizens. The trade-off is that you have federal legislation in the mix and you then need to deal with laws that are slower/harder to change; a big issue if the law was badly written or needs to be changed in a timely manner.
      - hprotagonist 4y ago
        Because that’s what marriage is?
      - agar 4y ago
- mc32 4y ago
  In this case I think preemption gives you widespread uniformity so it makes adherence easier to achieve and more predictability. Is those island gonna come up with weird stipulations, maybe Montana… uniformity in this case may be better.
- jfengel 4y ago
  States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws. The Internet is a global entity, and it doesn't strike me as being well served by the "laboratory of the states". Federal legislation is slow, but executive agencies can move faster if they are empowered by legislation to make rules. Congress sets broad principles, and it's not unreasonable that those principles should stay the same for a decade at a time, even in a fast-moving domain like privacy. And while regulatory agencies can be their own pieces of work, it is much easier to deal with one national agency's rules than 50 different ones.
  - takeda 4y ago
    > States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws. As a person who's data is being sold I would one up it and wish that each county would produce their own regulations. That business is a cancer.
    - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
      County? I’ll do you one better, locality. Every hamlet the world over with so much as a post office should have their policies.
      - 23B1 4y ago
        I'll do you one better: every individual has total domain over their own data.
        nopenopenopeno 4y ago
        That’s Authoritarianism!
        Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
        I appreciate you and your idea.
  - 4y ago
takeda 4y ago
That's weird that it was implement to preempt. Normally bills add on top of each other so why it is different here? As a Californian I would prefer that bills add additional protections especially when it comes to privacy.
1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago
EFF is quite popular among "nerds" but as a source for information and advocacy about electronic privacy I actually prefer EPIC.^1 Perhaps someone reading this can explain why, but I did not see anyone from the EFF at the 8 September 2022 public forum on the FTC's ANPR on Commercial Surveillance and Data Security. EPIC was there providing cogent commentary. The operater of thenexusofprivacy.net was there, too.^2 1. For example, here is a comparison of the ADPPA with the CCPA from the folks at EPIC. https://techpolicy.press/evaluating-the-american-data-privacy-and-protection-act/ https://techpolicy.press/evaluating-the-american-data-privac... 2. This is another topic that may interest HN thread readers. This is Section 18 "Mag-Moss" rulemaking so public input is mandatory. Those who understand the issues should submit comment to the FTC to support the process. The deadline is 21 October. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2022-0053-0001 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2022-0053-0001 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32947397 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32947397

by jdp23 4y ago

nugget 4y ago

Preemption would be an enormous mistake. Federal legislation moves at a glacial pace. In a field like privacy, you may only get to pass one substantial bill every 10 or 15 years. Technology moves too quickly for lawmakers at the Federal level to keep up. States can move much faster. Justice Brandeis popularized the phrase that "[the] states are the laboratories of democracy" and digital privacy law is a text book case of an emerging field that will benefit enormously from iterative experimentation at the state level.

yonaguska 4y ago
Yep, I personally only want federal pre-emption for restrictions on government. Shall not infringe type stuff.
rt4mn 4y ago
This is exactly why Microsoft has been throwing money at lobbyists at the state level as well, pushing shitty "consumer privacy bills", both because they don't like strong legal privacy rights at the state level, but also in the hopes of forestalling and kneecapping a strong federal baseline privacy bill. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/tech-lobbyists-are-pushing-bad-privacy-bills-washington-state-can-and-must-do https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/tech-lobbyists-are-pus...
- jdp23 4y ago
  Yep. We've fought them off here in Washington ... but they and Amazon just took it to other, more pliable states. Todd Feathers and Albert Ng had a very good article on this in The Markup a few months ago https://themarkup.org/privacy/2022/05/26/tech-industry-groups-are-watering-down-attempts-at-privacy-regulation-one-state-at-a-time https://themarkup.org/privacy/2022/05/26/tech-industry-group...
  - encryptluks2 4y ago
    Did we though? What bills does Washington have that could compare to the CCPA?
    - jdp23 4y ago
      None yet. Big tech companies have pushed various versions of the Bad Washington Privacy Act, which is weaker than CCPA. In 2021 and 2022, civil liberties, civil rights, and immigrant rights groups have supported the People's Privacy Act, which is a lot stronger than CCPA or ADPPA, but tech lobbying kept it from even getting a hearing. We'll see what happens in 2023 ... the Bad Washington Privacy Act's sponsor is retiring from the Senate (and is generally expected to become a full-time lobbyist), so the landscape should be different.
JumpCrisscross 4y ago
> Preemption would be an enormous mistake It creates a national standard. If we’re still debating the solution, sure, devolve to states. But if we’re near consensus, preëmption provides scale. This is American strength in a nutshell.
- autoexec 4y ago
  Yeah, nobody wants to have to constantly worry about compliance with 50+ different required standards which may or may not conflict with one another. Having one clear standard for services to follow is absolutely preferred so long as it actually does the job of protecting people's data privacy.
phpisthebest 4y ago
>>Preemption would be an enormous mistake Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything, without even touching the fact that Data privacy is in no way even close to any of the enumerated power of the US Federal Government Federal Laws almost always favor large companies, the exact companies these laws are needed to protect the consumer from Facebook, Microsoft, etc would love nothing more than to have the federal government take over because has "stake holders" they will be called on to write their own legislation, and will start the revolving door of hiring current, former and future regulators to work in the very corporations they are supposed to regulate. Federal laws never work for the average citizen
- hprotagonist 4y ago
  > Preemption is always a mistake, i am not sure why everyone wants federal laws for everything So that my marriage is recognized across state lines, for a start.
  - klabb3 4y ago
    Why would you the government to be involved in your marriage?
    - d4mi3n 4y ago
      I think the point GP is trying to make is that sometimes state governments try to get involved in marriage and having a federal policy that preempts that can prevent further meddling. This cuts both ways—with preemption, you can provide baseline rights or guarantees to citizens. The trade-off is that you have federal legislation in the mix and you then need to deal with laws that are slower/harder to change; a big issue if the law was badly written or needs to be changed in a timely manner.
    - hprotagonist 4y ago
      Because that’s what marriage is?
    - agar 4y ago
mc32 4y ago
In this case I think preemption gives you widespread uniformity so it makes adherence easier to achieve and more predictability. Is those island gonna come up with weird stipulations, maybe Montana… uniformity in this case may be better.
jfengel 4y ago
States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws. The Internet is a global entity, and it doesn't strike me as being well served by the "laboratory of the states". Federal legislation is slow, but executive agencies can move faster if they are empowered by legislation to make rules. Congress sets broad principles, and it's not unreasonable that those principles should stay the same for a decade at a time, even in a fast-moving domain like privacy. And while regulatory agencies can be their own pieces of work, it is much easier to deal with one national agency's rules than 50 different ones.
- takeda 4y ago
  > States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws. As a person who's data is being sold I would one up it and wish that each county would produce their own regulations. That business is a cancer.
  - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
    County? I’ll do you one better, locality. Every hamlet the world over with so much as a post office should have their policies.
    - 23B1 4y ago
      I'll do you one better: every individual has total domain over their own data.
      - nopenopenopeno 4y ago
        That’s Authoritarianism!
      - Red_Leaves_Flyy 4y ago
        I appreciate you and your idea.
- 4y ago

takeda 4y ago

That's weird that it was implement to preempt. Normally bills add on top of each other so why it is different here? As a Californian I would prefer that bills add additional protections especially when it comes to privacy.

1vuio0pswjnm7 4y ago

EFF is quite popular among "nerds" but as a source for information and advocacy about electronic privacy I actually prefer EPIC.^1 Perhaps someone reading this can explain why, but I did not see anyone from the EFF at the 8 September 2022 public forum on the FTC's ANPR on Commercial Surveillance and Data Security. EPIC was there providing cogent commentary. The operater of thenexusofprivacy.net was there, too.^2 1. For example, here is a comparison of the ADPPA with the CCPA from the folks at EPIC. https://techpolicy.press/evaluating-the-american-data-privacy-and-protection-act/ https://techpolicy.press/evaluating-the-american-data-privac... 2. This is another topic that may interest HN thread readers. This is Section 18 "Mag-Moss" rulemaking so public input is mandatory. Those who understand the issues should submit comment to the FTC to support the process. The deadline is 21 October. https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2022-0053-0001 https://www.regulations.gov/comment/FTC-2022-0053-0001 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32947397 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32947397