12 ms·
You can say whatever you like about the EU (corruption anyone?), but at the very least, they are countering Big Tech. Just that idea of effective balance of for
by CrypticShift 4y ago
You can say whatever you like about the EU (corruption anyone?), but at the very least, they are countering Big Tech. Just that idea of effective balance of force is a positive signal to me.
- flykespice 4y agoWhile I want monopoly companies to screw themselves. I don't like EU attitude to want to rule over foreign companies arbitrarily, it's a call to the colonial times when Europe wanted to make the world follow their rule and serve them.
- albertopv 4y agoIronic, considering US companies must provide their data to US gov even for non US persons or clients, and that's why Google and MS services are deemed illegal in many EU countries. BTW, no foreign company is forced to operate in Europe.
- m3drano 4y agoThese companies may not serve the European market. It's not mandatory.
- onlyrealcuzzo 4y agoMore importantly, it doesn't say: "You CANNOT serve the European market if you don't do x, y, and z globally." It just says what you have to do for European users.
- jjevanoorschot 4y ago> I don't like EU attitude to want to rule over foreign companies arbitrarily The EU wants to regulate its own internal market. Companies can choose to be active in that market.
- drooopy 4y agoThe EU government is simply laying the ground rules as to how businesses should operate inside the EU single market. They're not forcing Apple to change its business practices anywhere else in the world, as far as I understand. And Apple is free to leave the European market, if they do not like those conditions. Personally, as a consumer, I welcome this. And I hope that they don't just end at Apple. Google and Microsoft oughta be next.
- bkettle 4y agoIsn’t this sort of like saying that Apple is just dictating how developers should operate when creating apps for their phones? If developers don’t want to use the App Store, they are free to leave the market of Apple consumers.
- CrypticShift 4y ago> I don't like EU attitude to want to rule over foreign companies arbitrarily I agree in principle. How could they balance that force, without arbitrarily ruling over foreign companies? I don’t know. Maybe clarify what is "arbitrarily”?
- Swenrekcah 4y agoThe whole premise is simply wrong. The EU is setting rules for enterprises operating within their borders. Those that wish to operate must comply, others not.
- CrypticShift 4y ago> Those that wish to operate must comply Well, that is exactly the effective force I'm talking about. Can you imagine Apple not operating in Europe? However, this is "legal" authority. I'm trying to discuss the more subtle moral authority: Many even inside the continent, do not accept the moral authority of the EU. and they also use that "arbitrarily" word to justify their claims. So why not discuss that word in detail ? I’m not for downvoting replies to death. I’m more for letting people define their words better. It sometimes works. Sometimes.
- jsnell 4y ago> Can you imagine Apple not operating in Europe? Sure, we do after all have the example of some (non-Apple) companies not operating in China, a similarly important market. If Apple really believe their own rhetoric about how the only way to protect their users is for Apple to control the experience, they'll pull out of Europe rather than compromise on their users' security.
- CrypticShift 4y agoEurope is not China. I just talked about how this is about moral authority VS legal one. Here it is about commercial markets VS cultural centres. Europe is not just a market. Europe is the (historical) centre of the western world. I don't think big tech can/want to leave it. If they say so, IMO they are just bluffing.
- aussiesnack 4y agoThe list of nations that don't regulate how foreign companies operate within their own borders would be .. what?
- ben_w 4y agoScotland, Wales, Northern Ireland. But only because the UK is weird and insists it’s four nations. (And England kinda speaks for all of them for this kind of thing).
- aussiesnack 4y agoWell in the proper sense the EU isn't a nation in any case. I was being loose about the governmental level at which regulation of foreign entities take place, which I think is fine for a HN comment! > And England kinda speaks for all of them for this kind of thing Well yes, it's 4 nations, except that England doesn't believe in the other 3 ;) Though it's only just coming to terms with the self-existence of most of the old Empire for that matter. Writing as someone who was born in the least likeable of the UK nations (England), and has lived in all but Wales.
- flumpcakes 4y agoThe EU passes laws to protect it's own citizens. If you don't want to follow these laws, then don't sell products to the EU. It's that simple really. Comparing it to "colonial times" is pretty egregious.
- ako 4y agoAny company that wants to do business in the EU has to comply with European rules, and their products have to comply with European guidelines. Electronics, cars, food, everything had to comply to rules. This includes antitrust policies.
- drooopy 4y agoYou'll find corrupted politicians in every government in every country in the world. And yes, the EU has the strongest consumer protection laws anywhere in the west.
- joenot443 4y agoYeah. Though for us entirely outside the political sphere of influence for the decision making, it's a tad bittersweet having to take the bad with the good. Love my unified USB-C, don't love clicking GDPR cookie banners.
- _abox 4y agoGDPR didn't enforce cookie banners. Sites can simply not track if they actually care about their users. If they don't track they don't need to ask for anything. And a lot of these dark pattern cookie banners are not GDPR compliant. It should default to not track even if you don't press anything. And clicking 40 different reject buttons isn't allowed either. This needs serious policing.
- ApolloFortyNine 4y agoUntargeted ads make 50% less than targeted ones. So you're basically saying the alternative is don't exist for the vast majority of sites, reducing revenue by 50% and surviving is just about impossible for every internet company. And if they wanted to turn every site into subscription overnight, they could have made this an optional provided header to opt out. Every browser could implement that in days.
- GekkePrutser 4y agoNo not really. When everyone does it, untargered ads will be the norm and will just be more valuable. Just like they were before adtech happened. Also, 50% less doesn't have to mean not to exist. I do wish they had mandated the existing do not track flag to be honored though without presenting any popups. This would have finally made that flag useful and would have made things much easier. I know some browsers have removed it but it's easy to bring back.
- _jal 4y agoIf you run something like Little Snitch, blocking the CDNs of the banner-providers does wonders. Takes a little trial and error, very worth it.
- mrtksn 4y ago> EU (corruption anyone?) It's strange that EU catching corruption and acting on it made it look corrupt. It's like the seat belts making people think the cars are not safe.
- TheRealDunkirk 4y agoI remember a big stink about corruption in the Olympic Games when it went to Utah, and giving my mormon friend some crap about it. He pointed out that it's always been DEEPLY corrupt, and the only problem was that the Utah officials didn't go along with it, and that's what caused all the press. I don't know how much of that is actually true, but it seems analogous.
- walrus01 4y agoIf you learn how many MLM headquarters are based in Utah it begins to make sense.
- seydor 4y agoIt was the Belgian police that did. The EU bureaucracy (parliament and otherwise - it's so big) does have known corruption problems.
- mrtksn 4y agoKnown corruption problems? Maybe someone should tell the Belgian police when they are still in Brussels then!
- mbesto 4y ago> but at the very least, they are countering Big Tech. Honestly, I think this is partly to do with the fact that very few of these "Big Tech" companies are founded and primarily operate in the EU.
- foepys 4y agoAll laws also apply to EU companies plus EU companies have to adhere to EU laws from the start while non-EU companies can focus on more lenient regulations until they are ready to move into the EU market. If anything this kind of legislation is more damaging to EU companies.
- mbesto 4y agoOf course, but you don't think the gov't is more selective and more punitive against the larger players? Law is inherently discretionary.
- sofixa 4y agoWhy do you think that? They've successfully intervened in anticompetitive markets even where all participants are fully EU based (e.g. railways, train manufacturers).
- robswc 4y agoI think it's also caused a feedback loop. Very hard to get things off the ground (at least relatively speaking) in Europe. The software salaries also reflect that.
- simplyinfinity 4y agoShow me a government that has 0 corruption. No system is perfect, but there's better ones and worse ones. IMO EU is one of the better ones, but not a perfect one, obviously :)
- rad_gruchalski 4y agoI wonder what’s the status of CRA after Kaili’s arrest. How can we be sure that CRA isn’t some sort of lobbyist exercise?
- donohoe 4y agoJust wait till you learn about the USA
- macinjosh 4y agoI am huge EU skeptic, but this one really does push back on my beliefs. I find it very disappointing it took such an action for Apple to do the right thing. Way to go EU!