3 ms·
It's just a lot simpler to block than having to keep up with laws in other countries for businesses who don't even do business in those countries. It's not like
by cronix 3y ago
It's just a lot simpler to block than having to keep up with laws in other countries for businesses who don't even do business in those countries. It's not like it's hard or time consuming to implement, and cheaper than your other suggestion further down of consulting a lawyer every time one of these pops up, like "do I have to annoy my customers with these stupid cookie popups every time they visit?" Why should I have to spend a dime for something that is external to my company, has nothing to do with it, and have to constantly keep on top of it? We don't even sell our services there. Why should I even waste the bandwidth? Our firewalls are sure a lot less active, as well. Why should I waste time answering emails from people we don't sell to? It's better to just not get them. I guess my question to you is why do YOU care if they're accessible or not? If a (local) business really just wants to sell within their own (local) country (or even smaller municipality such as state/county/city), is there something wrong with blocking everything outside it out and just not worrying about it?
- BrandoElFollito 3y ago> It's just a lot simpler to block than having to keep up with laws in other countries for businesses who don't even do business in those countries. Exactly, except that it is just simpler to do nothing. Do you (I assume you are not in either of the countries I give an examples, nor travel there) worry about laws in, say, China when you state "Taiwan is an independent country", or Russia when you say "Russia invaded Ukraine", or North Korea when you say "NK is a tyranny", or France when you say "Retirement should be at 60 and not 64". No. Because the local laws that forbid these statements are, well, local. Nobody cares outside of these countries. They could send you letters informing that you did wrong and that you have to pay 1M USD and you would just put that to trash. > I guess my question to you is why do YOU care if they're accessible or not? If a (local) business really just wants to sell within their own (local) country (or even smaller municipality such as state/county/city), is there something wrong with blocking everything outside it out and just not worrying about it? I do not care - it is just that I ended serendipitously on a few of these places and was wondering why they care (I would not care about the cookie law in Zimbabwe or Patagonia if I had a web site).
- BrandoElFollito 3y agoAh, now I remember how I got to one of these pages. I wanted to have a look at the local newspaper of Tuttle, Oklahoma because of a funny (and sad for open source devs) event that happened there in 2006: https://www.theregister.com/2006/03/24/tuttle_centos/ https://www.theregister.com/2006/03/24/tuttle_centos/. It was blocked for GDPR reasons (at the time at least)
- cronix 3y agoOur hacking attempts dropped by approx 85%, and we use less bandwidth. There are other benefits to blocking traffic to places where you don't do business. > They could send you letters informing that you did wrong and that you have to pay 1M USD and you would just put that to trash. I think it's just better to not get those letters in the first place (any more than spam phone calls or texts) and have to waste time reading them, or having to possibly consult an attorney over them to see if they have merit. It's just not something I want to be bothered with, nor should I. It has nothing to do with the company, what we do or our customers. > Do you (I assume you are not in either of the countries I give an examples, nor travel there) worry about laws in, say, China when you state "Taiwan is an independent country", or Russia when you say "Russia invaded Ukraine", or North Korea when you say "NK is a tyranny", or France when you say "Retirement should be at 60 and not 64". We don't say anything like that on our company sites.