4 ms·

The opposite actually, if the law says you cannot murder, it doesn't become legal because you used a hammer instead of a gun. Your question is essentially "wel

The opposite actually, if the law says you cannot murder, it doesn't become legal because you used a hammer instead of a gun. Your question is essentially "well what if I use a knife, because knives can be used for skinning, which is a legitimate use!". It doesn't work that way.

Alupis 4y ago
Like I said, that would be the first law of it's kind. We have zero laws that specify how a website is operated on the technical level. Or how it's engineered or designed. Nothing exists that is comparable to what is being proposed.
- P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
  That's true, I think the point is that such laws need to start getting created because the compute and personal device issue is legitimately different.
  - Alupis 4y ago
    The problem with this, is the technology evolves far quicker than our laws do. The ADA law is a glaring example of this, unfortunately.
    - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
      Apparently if you outlaw murder, the fact that people are constantly creating new ways to murder makes it confusing as to whether or not murder is outlawed.
      - Alupis 4y ago
        No, because murder is still illegal. In a technical setting, we can't even reliably describe how things will operate 5 years from now. Imagine a law that specified how frames were to operate... and now no one uses frames. Just imagine a law that says "no tracking". What is tracking? How is it done? How do we know it when we see it? All of this must be defined... and these definitions are fuzzy and change rapidly. The ADA law specifically says you must make your website accessible... but fails to specify what accessible even means in a modern setting. That's the pitfalls of trying to regulate how things are designed in a technical setting. Perhaps it's possible, but I have not yet seen a good law that made an attempt.
        P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
        Docker is 9 years old, try again. No, actually, don't. I reject everything about your premise. "What even IS ACCESSIBILITY, OMG, you can't explain that!?!?!". I mean ... maybe YOU can't, but plenty of people can.
        Alupis 4y ago
        No, nobody can. Not even the folks that wrote the law. Not even the folks that enforce the law (DOJ) (referencing the ADA law in regards to websites). You can go look for yourself... it's created an entire cottage industry of would-be vexatious litigants, if any of the suits actually went to court. So no, it is not easy to define or describe. There is an incredible amount of detail that must be hammered out to make it easy for everyone to become compliant. We can also reference the EU's GDPR, or California's CCPA/CPRA. All of which are struggling to actually clearly define what they mean. What is an essential cookie? What does it mean to sell someone's personal data? Neither are what you might actually believe... You can reject it all you want, but that does not change the reality I'm afraid.
        P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
        What you're describing is called interpretation of the law, and weirdly enough, legal systems have been doing that for the better part of 600 years.

Alupis 4y ago

Like I said, that would be the first law of it's kind. We have zero laws that specify how a website is operated on the technical level. Or how it's engineered or designed. Nothing exists that is comparable to what is being proposed.

P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
That's true, I think the point is that such laws need to start getting created because the compute and personal device issue is legitimately different.
- Alupis 4y ago
  The problem with this, is the technology evolves far quicker than our laws do. The ADA law is a glaring example of this, unfortunately.
  - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
    Apparently if you outlaw murder, the fact that people are constantly creating new ways to murder makes it confusing as to whether or not murder is outlawed.
    - Alupis 4y ago
      No, because murder is still illegal. In a technical setting, we can't even reliably describe how things will operate 5 years from now. Imagine a law that specified how frames were to operate... and now no one uses frames. Just imagine a law that says "no tracking". What is tracking? How is it done? How do we know it when we see it? All of this must be defined... and these definitions are fuzzy and change rapidly. The ADA law specifically says you must make your website accessible... but fails to specify what accessible even means in a modern setting. That's the pitfalls of trying to regulate how things are designed in a technical setting. Perhaps it's possible, but I have not yet seen a good law that made an attempt.
      - P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
        Docker is 9 years old, try again. No, actually, don't. I reject everything about your premise. "What even IS ACCESSIBILITY, OMG, you can't explain that!?!?!". I mean ... maybe YOU can't, but plenty of people can.
        Alupis 4y ago
        No, nobody can. Not even the folks that wrote the law. Not even the folks that enforce the law (DOJ) (referencing the ADA law in regards to websites). You can go look for yourself... it's created an entire cottage industry of would-be vexatious litigants, if any of the suits actually went to court. So no, it is not easy to define or describe. There is an incredible amount of detail that must be hammered out to make it easy for everyone to become compliant. We can also reference the EU's GDPR, or California's CCPA/CPRA. All of which are struggling to actually clearly define what they mean. What is an essential cookie? What does it mean to sell someone's personal data? Neither are what you might actually believe... You can reject it all you want, but that does not change the reality I'm afraid.
        P5fRxh5kUvp2th 4y ago
        What you're describing is called interpretation of the law, and weirdly enough, legal systems have been doing that for the better part of 600 years.