6 ms·
Americans like to complain about the GDPR, but it exists to prevent exactly this sort of thing. Data cannot be retained longer than it's actually needed or requ
by ascorbic 2y ago
Americans like to complain about the GDPR, but it exists to prevent exactly this sort of thing. Data cannot be retained longer than it's actually needed or required by law, and can't be sold without explicit permission. Law enforcement can't just buy data: they need to have legal authority to get it (though in many countries the bar for that is too low). In most cases the cheapest and easiest approach is to collect as little data as possible, and to delete it as soon as it's not strictly needed. This greatly reduces the compliance burden.
- PierceJoy 2y agoDo Americans complain about the GDPR? I’ve only ever seen them say they wish the US had something similar.
- Kwpolska 2y agoAmerican businesses, especially in predatory industries like adtech, complain all the time.
- _heimdall 2y agoI would hardly roll that up to all Americans though. Of course companies who's business model is seriously hurt by GDPR would complain. Most Americans wouldn't even know what GDPR is, let alone have a reason to complain about it.
- Jensson 2y agoThey are talking about Americans on this site, who very often work at companies that GDPR is made to stop predating on users. Many European users here also works at such companies, so you often see it from them as well, but not as often since those companies are mostly American.
- _heimdall 2y agoAh got it, I totally missed that context here somehow. I hadn't noticed a habit of Americans here complaining about GDPR, but that's interesting given another common pattern here of libertarian ideas. An American complaining about a different countries internal policies doesn't seem particularly libertarian.
- mschuster91 2y ago"but the cookie banners look so bad and ugly!" Well, that's kinda the point, but way too many website owners rather torture their users with barely compliant implementations than do what the GDPR intended: get rid of third parties.
- floydnoel 2y ago> way too many website owners rather torture their users including official EU websites
- CaptainZapp 2y agoWhich usually have an [ACCEPT] [REJECT] without any dark patterns whatsoever.
- ascorbic 2y agoAlso cookie banners are from the e-privacy directive, not the GDPR.
- petre 2y agoI'm positive informed consent doesn't require cookie banners, but the advertisers opted to make it as annoying as possible so that everyone would click "accept" just to be left alone. It could be a browser mechanism that only asks once for all sites and have a whitelist.
- ascorbic 2y agoYes, mostly blaming them for cookie banners (which aren't because of the GDPR) but also because it makes them need to think about compliance.
- rdm_blackhole 2y agoYou obviously did not follow the recent drama in the EU related to Chat Control V2. The EU wants LEOs to have access to the contents of your messages/emails/metadata and keeps extending the Chat Control V1 law in order to not have to delete the data that it already has. You may not be able to buy that data outright but it will be out there and collected by the messaging providers on behalf of the EU. It even had a data retention law that forced providers to keep up to 8 years of data related to their customers so that it could be handed over to LEOs. The EU's stance on privacy is just lipstick on a pig. When you pick under the curtain of the privacy laws in the EU, you'll see that it's not better here than in the US.
- ascorbic 2y agoI was talking about the GDPR, not EU regulations in general.
- hedora 2y agoThe US also has laws that, in isolation, would suggest some sort of protection against universal corporate/government surveillance, but they’re no more effective here than in the EU.
- rdm_blackhole 2y agoHow does it look on one hand to say that the EU cares about it's users data and wants the users to be able to choose who it is shared with, has clear guidelines related to it's storage and levy fines on companies who breach these terms and then turn around and come out with Chat Control V2? Something does not compute. Either you are pro privacy and you act like it or you are not. It kills me to hear that Europe is pro privacy, because it is not true. Not if you look under the veneer and start peeling back the layers. These sorts of data breaches should be a wake up call for any state actors who are planning on collecting massive amounts of data on their citizens. It should make them pause and say, you know maybe we should not just give away all our data to Russia or China if they manage to break in our system. Maybe the best way to avoid such data breaches is to not store the data in the first place.
- elric 2y agoLet's not pretend that the GDPR fixes this in any way. There are still EU data retention laws in place which force ISPs/carriers/... to store all kinds of data for a reasonably long time. I don't know who Europe's biggest telco is, but if they got breached, the damage would be just as bad.