4 ms·

> I don't want my X posts being handed over to researchers even if they are technically public. Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU, but b

> I don't want my X posts being handed over to researchers even if they are technically public. Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU, but because X wants EU users, they're participating in a market where they need to follow the law of the market. If you disagree with X's choice of participating in that market, you should vote with your wallet/attention. > On social media and chat platforms there is an expectation of the posts and chat messages you make to be private due to being in an obscure section of the website That might be, but the internet unfortunately doesn't work like that, they are public platforms, so the information there is treated as public information, which it is. If you make it invite-only, I understand the expectation of privacy and private conversation, but for platforms with open signup? Don't participate and share stuff you don't want to be public, it's kind of easy.

calvinmorrison 11mo ago
"Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU" Right... and maybe next the US won't let Europe have any IP space. It's the internet. A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from..
- remus 11mo ago
  > A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from. Why is that? I think you can reasonably argue that a user should enjoy the protections offered by law in the place they live.
  - wyldberry 11mo ago
    They can, they just need to use the EU equivalent of <app> they want. No one is forcing EU residents to use <app>.
    - schubidubiduba 11mo ago
      You've got it the wrong way around. No one is forcing X to operate in the EU. If they want to do that, they need to follow EU laws.
- barbazoo 11mo ago
  Would you accept or the opposite situation then? A foreign company operating in and violating US law?
- embedding-shape 11mo ago
  > A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from So if I run a business from a country where cocaine is legal, I should be able to sell to users in the US? Are you sure you thought this through? Seems you're letting your emotions get in the way of your reasoning.
  - toast0 11mo ago
    Absolutely. A US user sends you money, you send them product. US customs takes the product at the border, and if you transit the border expect to be arrested. Your customer should expect to be arrested as well. Maybe you get put on a list so US banks can't send you money anymore too.
    - embedding-shape 11mo ago
      So same thing happens here, except we're talking packets, and going across wires. They got caught using illegal packets across wires in the country in question, so they get fined. If you have legal presence, then that entity gets the fine. Makes perfect sense for me in both cases.
      - toast0 11mo ago
        If they have presence, then yeah. You have to follow the laws everywhere you have presence. Otherwise you get arrested. (more or less)
        1718627440 11mo ago
        That's why the EU requires presence in the EU, when you want to process EU data. This IS exactly what happens here.
        trothamel 11mo ago
        If you don't have a presence in the EU, then the EU can't require anything of you.
- femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
  This is pretty much the position of China when it comes to IP law. It's compelling in some senses, but notably the U.S. does not agree.
- exe34 11mo ago
  it can apply US law in the US, yes. in the EU, it needs to follow EU law.
  - aydyn 11mo ago
    And US laws too because lets be honest, EU is a vassal state.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
    - ben_w 11mo ago
      The current US admin oviously treats it as such, but the EU is 27* nations who don't want to be vassalised* and who work together* to project collective strength on par with the US and China. * except possibly Hungary.
  - embedding-shape 11mo ago
    To be fair, it's a relatively new concept for many American companies, that they need to follow the laws of the locations they operate in, some companies need a bit of a push to properly understand how the world outside of the US culture bubble works.
    - tensor 11mo ago
      It's actually not. US companies are very used to it and frequently comply with local laws (e.g. in China and elsewhere). What's happening here is a vocal minority is trying to push for some notion of US dominance over other countries. The current administration has openly stated their intent to bully selected countries they don't like in various ways, but especially when it relates to their ability to push US propaganda to foreign places via companies like X.
- e2le 11mo ago
  Pardon my ignorance, but I don't believe RIPE is a US organisation or branch of the US government. Any attempts by the US government to assert control of a foreign non-profit entity such as RIPE is only going to end in tears. I suspect would also empower those pushing to balkanise the internet should the independence of RIPE or ARIN be violated. I'm not sure region specific intranets is a future anyone should want.
  - calvinmorrison 11mo ago
    > Any attempts by the US government to assert control of a foreign non-profit entity such as RIPE is only going to end in tears. The irony of how blind you are. EU trying to enforce censorship laws on American companies will end in tears.
    - tensor 11mo ago
      If those US companies operate in foreign countries, then yes they will be following the law in those countries or they won't be operating there. And no, the only tears flowing will be from those who don't understand how laws and borders work. This has always been true. E.g. Google and others complying with Chinese laws, or not operating at all in places like Iran. X can simply cease operations in EU if they don't like it.
    - deleted 11mo ago
      [deleted]
charcircuit 11mo ago
The issue is that these laws apply to sites that are accessible in the EU which is the default state of a site on the internet, and personally I would like to avoid a balkanization of the internet. I would like to see the US government protect our websites from the EU's laws. Especially when it involves a US citizen (eg. taking a US citizens data).
- orwin 11mo ago
  X could just refuse to pay European advertisers and not allow EU user to pay for its premium version. Here, problem fixed.
- embedding-shape 11mo ago
  > The issue is that these laws apply to sites that are accessible in the EU which is the default state of a site on the internet It doesn't though, it applies those laws if the entity in question happen to also be slurping up a bunch of user data and selling/using it for various purpose, something which requires intent and active work to do. If they instead didn't do those things, these laws wouldn't apply to them in the first place. Random American HN users just having a website public on the internet without perverse tracking has nothing to worry about, and does not have to care about GDPR, EU rules or much else.
  - neverrroot 11mo ago
    You are really mixing things here, tbh, not sure whether in good faith.
- ampersandwhich 11mo ago
  I see where this concern comes from. But I think people overinterpret the EU’s legislative agenda by focusing on which companies get fined. Since American firms dominate the global tech market, they naturally end up in the crosshairs more often. That can look like a racket if you disagree with the laws, especially given the size of the penalties. I think a more mundane explanation, which I personally subscribe to, is that Europeans have different priorities than Americans. They don’t want the same trade-offs, and they’re willing to make certain business models economically unviable if they believe those models are harmful or in bad taste. US companies are disproportionately affected because they don't share those values. First amendment, etc. From the outside, this can create the impression of "hidden motives": the stated reasons sound unconvincing, the effects fall heavily on US companies, and so people infer that the EU is targeting Americans. But really, I think we're just different. If US laws disproportionately burdened EU citizens, I’d expect Europeans to be equally upset. It's only natural. I'm sure few people in Europe would be thrilled to find out that GDPR doesn't apply to ChatGPT because they got involved in some copyright lawsuit in New York. That said, there's always a mix of motivations. I'm personally not a fan of other EU initiatives, like the one on encryption, but I think GDPR and DSA mostly mirror what the average João wants. I'm not sure most people care that much about the geopolitics.
EdiX 11mo ago
What they should do, actually, is sue the EU for harassment in the US, like 4chan and the kiwifarms did with the UK. And then the EU can start firewalling X. Firewall everything bad, age gate everything, throw up the great firewall of the EU. I need Brussels to protect my freedoms.

calvinmorrison 11mo ago

"Then X shouldn't make their business available in the EU" Right... and maybe next the US won't let Europe have any IP space. It's the internet. A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from..

remus 11mo ago
> A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from. Why is that? I think you can reasonably argue that a user should enjoy the protections offered by law in the place they live.
- wyldberry 11mo ago
  They can, they just need to use the EU equivalent of <app> they want. No one is forcing EU residents to use <app>.
  - schubidubiduba 11mo ago
    You've got it the wrong way around. No one is forcing X to operate in the EU. If they want to do that, they need to follow EU laws.
barbazoo 11mo ago
Would you accept or the opposite situation then? A foreign company operating in and violating US law?
embedding-shape 11mo ago
> A US business needs to be governed by US law, not whatever law that a user chooses to access their site from So if I run a business from a country where cocaine is legal, I should be able to sell to users in the US? Are you sure you thought this through? Seems you're letting your emotions get in the way of your reasoning.
- toast0 11mo ago
  Absolutely. A US user sends you money, you send them product. US customs takes the product at the border, and if you transit the border expect to be arrested. Your customer should expect to be arrested as well. Maybe you get put on a list so US banks can't send you money anymore too.
  - embedding-shape 11mo ago
    So same thing happens here, except we're talking packets, and going across wires. They got caught using illegal packets across wires in the country in question, so they get fined. If you have legal presence, then that entity gets the fine. Makes perfect sense for me in both cases.
    - toast0 11mo ago
      If they have presence, then yeah. You have to follow the laws everywhere you have presence. Otherwise you get arrested. (more or less)
      - 1718627440 11mo ago
        That's why the EU requires presence in the EU, when you want to process EU data. This IS exactly what happens here.
        trothamel 11mo ago
        If you don't have a presence in the EU, then the EU can't require anything of you.
femiagbabiaka 11mo ago
This is pretty much the position of China when it comes to IP law. It's compelling in some senses, but notably the U.S. does not agree.
exe34 11mo ago
it can apply US law in the US, yes. in the EU, it needs to follow EU law.
- aydyn 11mo ago
  And US laws too because lets be honest, EU is a vassal state.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]
  - ben_w 11mo ago
    The current US admin oviously treats it as such, but the EU is 27* nations who don't want to be vassalised* and who work together* to project collective strength on par with the US and China. * except possibly Hungary.
- embedding-shape 11mo ago
  To be fair, it's a relatively new concept for many American companies, that they need to follow the laws of the locations they operate in, some companies need a bit of a push to properly understand how the world outside of the US culture bubble works.
  - tensor 11mo ago
    It's actually not. US companies are very used to it and frequently comply with local laws (e.g. in China and elsewhere). What's happening here is a vocal minority is trying to push for some notion of US dominance over other countries. The current administration has openly stated their intent to bully selected countries they don't like in various ways, but especially when it relates to their ability to push US propaganda to foreign places via companies like X.
e2le 11mo ago
Pardon my ignorance, but I don't believe RIPE is a US organisation or branch of the US government. Any attempts by the US government to assert control of a foreign non-profit entity such as RIPE is only going to end in tears. I suspect would also empower those pushing to balkanise the internet should the independence of RIPE or ARIN be violated. I'm not sure region specific intranets is a future anyone should want.
- calvinmorrison 11mo ago
  > Any attempts by the US government to assert control of a foreign non-profit entity such as RIPE is only going to end in tears. The irony of how blind you are. EU trying to enforce censorship laws on American companies will end in tears.
  - tensor 11mo ago
    If those US companies operate in foreign countries, then yes they will be following the law in those countries or they won't be operating there. And no, the only tears flowing will be from those who don't understand how laws and borders work. This has always been true. E.g. Google and others complying with Chinese laws, or not operating at all in places like Iran. X can simply cease operations in EU if they don't like it.
  - deleted 11mo ago
    [deleted]

charcircuit 11mo ago

The issue is that these laws apply to sites that are accessible in the EU which is the default state of a site on the internet, and personally I would like to avoid a balkanization of the internet. I would like to see the US government protect our websites from the EU's laws. Especially when it involves a US citizen (eg. taking a US citizens data).

orwin 11mo ago
X could just refuse to pay European advertisers and not allow EU user to pay for its premium version. Here, problem fixed.
embedding-shape 11mo ago
> The issue is that these laws apply to sites that are accessible in the EU which is the default state of a site on the internet It doesn't though, it applies those laws if the entity in question happen to also be slurping up a bunch of user data and selling/using it for various purpose, something which requires intent and active work to do. If they instead didn't do those things, these laws wouldn't apply to them in the first place. Random American HN users just having a website public on the internet without perverse tracking has nothing to worry about, and does not have to care about GDPR, EU rules or much else.
- neverrroot 11mo ago
  You are really mixing things here, tbh, not sure whether in good faith.
ampersandwhich 11mo ago
I see where this concern comes from. But I think people overinterpret the EU’s legislative agenda by focusing on which companies get fined. Since American firms dominate the global tech market, they naturally end up in the crosshairs more often. That can look like a racket if you disagree with the laws, especially given the size of the penalties. I think a more mundane explanation, which I personally subscribe to, is that Europeans have different priorities than Americans. They don’t want the same trade-offs, and they’re willing to make certain business models economically unviable if they believe those models are harmful or in bad taste. US companies are disproportionately affected because they don't share those values. First amendment, etc. From the outside, this can create the impression of "hidden motives": the stated reasons sound unconvincing, the effects fall heavily on US companies, and so people infer that the EU is targeting Americans. But really, I think we're just different. If US laws disproportionately burdened EU citizens, I’d expect Europeans to be equally upset. It's only natural. I'm sure few people in Europe would be thrilled to find out that GDPR doesn't apply to ChatGPT because they got involved in some copyright lawsuit in New York. That said, there's always a mix of motivations. I'm personally not a fan of other EU initiatives, like the one on encryption, but I think GDPR and DSA mostly mirror what the average João wants. I'm not sure most people care that much about the geopolitics.

EdiX 11mo ago

What they should do, actually, is sue the EU for harassment in the US, like 4chan and the kiwifarms did with the UK. And then the EU can start firewalling X. Firewall everything bad, age gate everything, throw up the great firewall of the EU. I need Brussels to protect my freedoms.