4 ms·

I've spoken to many people in the USA that are anti-union and anti-regulation. The impression they have is that regulation is used to stomp out small businesse

by dijit 3y ago

I've spoken to many people in the USA that are anti-union and anti-regulation. The impression they have is that regulation is used to stomp out small businesses (and unions have some propensity for corruption). The EU regulation does not come with the same feelings, aside from the very aggressive FUD around GDPR. EU regulation is typically seen as something for the consumer/public good and not intended to stifle competition. With that in mind, it's interesting to see him arguing for regulation in the US, yet against regulation in the EU.

touisteur 3y ago
Very important to keep in mind that a large part of European regulations are meant to encourage competition within the EU. I'm not clear on the results but the goals are very often clear. There are also moral and ecological stances, but still trying to impose them in a way that doesn't stiffle competition within the EU.
Tangurena2 3y ago
The difference in philosophy is part of the issue. The EU leans towards the precautionary principle (first, show us that it is safe). The US leans towards reactionary regulation (something terrible happened, let's make sure it doesn't happen again). There is also a large difference in practice. In the US, it is possible to get rid of regulations via lawsuits or "lobbying". It is also possible to corrupt public discourse with large amounts of advertising (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36067401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36067401). It is much harder to apply US-style lobbying to EU regulators (one of the motivations for Brexit was to get away from EU regulators), so American companies will try very hard to get out from the regulations while making money from EU customers. What he wants is toothless & after-the-fact regulation that will not reduce his income.
revelio 3y ago
Feelings from whom? Because for sure that's a very common feeling in Europe about EU regulations. It was a big part of the political campaigning around Brexit, even. You even admit this - nobody feels this way, except for the people who very strongly feel that way but their feelings are "FUD" so don't count?
- dijit 3y ago
  it is literal fear, uncertainty, and doubt. GDPR often gets blown out of all proportion by people who seem to have a vested interest in having the regulation scrapped. This played out the same with the EU cookie directive which was intended to give people consent on how they were tracked- with massive carve outs for legitimate use, the intention was that people would cut down on that tracking to avoid needing a popup; but ended up in some form of malicious compliance where everyone just put up pop-ups instead and tried to hide the opt-out with dark patterns.. massively overblowing what the regulation even entailed in the first place by claiming that the pop-up was necessary.
  - revelio 3y ago
    GDPR creates a lot of FUD because: - The penalties are massive: fear - The wording is vague: uncertainty - What to do is unclear: doubt That's entirely on the EU. I have no vested interest in GDPR one way or another at the moment and yet having been involved in assessment projects in the past, it is a crap law that makes the EU look incompetent and stupid. Nobody can figure out what the hell it means in all kinds of common scenarios. HN is full of people saying it's simple; I have yet to encounter any of these people inside actual enterprises, doing actual implementations of it. People who think it's easy are invariably eurofans engaging in wishful thinking. > the intention was that people would cut down on that tracking to avoid needing a popup; but ended up in some form of malicious compliance That's not how it was. The EU passed an incompetent law with unclear goals that kills the ability to do business of anyone who doesn't implement the banners. Cookies are in fact necessary, not optional, not nice to have. They are required. Thus everyone implements the banners, the internet got worse, the EU now looks foolish in front of the world and yet can't accept it.
    - dijit 3y ago
      The problem is, everyone talks about the GDPR but they don't actually read it. If you read it, it's really clear: if you're not sending information to third parties then it's exceptionally easy to be compliant. A lot of things are "to best effort" which puts the burden of proof on the prosecution that you were grossly negligent. There is a dedicated website to explaining the regulation for dummies; https://gdpr.eu https://gdpr.eu -- the entire thing is 11 chapters, half of that is for governments to harmonise their national regulations to be GDPR compliant without people needing to invoke "GDPR", the remainder is a mix of common sense and ensuring digital privacy and consent. It's really clear for a legal document. I should know, it's my part of job to read them and to ensure my company is compliant. It's not hard. The most loud people about this are lawyers who have a financial incentive to make it as hard as possible.

by dijit 3y ago

touisteur 3y ago

Very important to keep in mind that a large part of European regulations are meant to encourage competition within the EU. I'm not clear on the results but the goals are very often clear. There are also moral and ecological stances, but still trying to impose them in a way that doesn't stiffle competition within the EU.

Tangurena2 3y ago

The difference in philosophy is part of the issue. The EU leans towards the precautionary principle (first, show us that it is safe). The US leans towards reactionary regulation (something terrible happened, let's make sure it doesn't happen again). There is also a large difference in practice. In the US, it is possible to get rid of regulations via lawsuits or "lobbying". It is also possible to corrupt public discourse with large amounts of advertising (see https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36067401 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36067401). It is much harder to apply US-style lobbying to EU regulators (one of the motivations for Brexit was to get away from EU regulators), so American companies will try very hard to get out from the regulations while making money from EU customers. What he wants is toothless & after-the-fact regulation that will not reduce his income.

revelio 3y ago

Feelings from whom? Because for sure that's a very common feeling in Europe about EU regulations. It was a big part of the political campaigning around Brexit, even. You even admit this - nobody feels this way, except for the people who very strongly feel that way but their feelings are "FUD" so don't count?

dijit 3y ago
it is literal fear, uncertainty, and doubt. GDPR often gets blown out of all proportion by people who seem to have a vested interest in having the regulation scrapped. This played out the same with the EU cookie directive which was intended to give people consent on how they were tracked- with massive carve outs for legitimate use, the intention was that people would cut down on that tracking to avoid needing a popup; but ended up in some form of malicious compliance where everyone just put up pop-ups instead and tried to hide the opt-out with dark patterns.. massively overblowing what the regulation even entailed in the first place by claiming that the pop-up was necessary.
- revelio 3y ago
  GDPR creates a lot of FUD because: - The penalties are massive: fear - The wording is vague: uncertainty - What to do is unclear: doubt That's entirely on the EU. I have no vested interest in GDPR one way or another at the moment and yet having been involved in assessment projects in the past, it is a crap law that makes the EU look incompetent and stupid. Nobody can figure out what the hell it means in all kinds of common scenarios. HN is full of people saying it's simple; I have yet to encounter any of these people inside actual enterprises, doing actual implementations of it. People who think it's easy are invariably eurofans engaging in wishful thinking. > the intention was that people would cut down on that tracking to avoid needing a popup; but ended up in some form of malicious compliance That's not how it was. The EU passed an incompetent law with unclear goals that kills the ability to do business of anyone who doesn't implement the banners. Cookies are in fact necessary, not optional, not nice to have. They are required. Thus everyone implements the banners, the internet got worse, the EU now looks foolish in front of the world and yet can't accept it.
  - dijit 3y ago
    The problem is, everyone talks about the GDPR but they don't actually read it. If you read it, it's really clear: if you're not sending information to third parties then it's exceptionally easy to be compliant. A lot of things are "to best effort" which puts the burden of proof on the prosecution that you were grossly negligent. There is a dedicated website to explaining the regulation for dummies; https://gdpr.eu https://gdpr.eu -- the entire thing is 11 chapters, half of that is for governments to harmonise their national regulations to be GDPR compliant without people needing to invoke "GDPR", the remainder is a mix of common sense and ensuring digital privacy and consent. It's really clear for a legal document. I should know, it's my part of job to read them and to ensure my company is compliant. It's not hard. The most loud people about this are lawyers who have a financial incentive to make it as hard as possible.