3 ms·

Many companies will go bankrupt if X will happen. X=(tape recording, internet, ATMs, privacy laws, any kind of regulation). I can't really hear this argument a

Many companies will go bankrupt if X will happen. X=(tape recording, internet, ATMs, privacy laws, any kind of regulation). I can't really hear this argument any more. Sure, any regulation will have bad side effects, but who are we? A planet full of people or a planet of companies that want to maximize profit on our back? The world will not end if we are allowed some more privacy for us.

danso 14y ago
I think "Sure, any regulation will have bad side effects" was the rallying cry of the SOPA backers
- patrickg 14y ago
  Good point :) I think my point is: "if we don't implement SOPA, we (the companies) are all gonna die!" Don't know how to express it in general, but I hope I can make my view clear.
- pyre 14y ago
  The point isn't "all regulation is good." The point is that "some companies will go out of business" isn't necessarily a good argument. To continue your SOPA connection, "Google will go out of business if SOPA is enacted," isn't a good argument in and of itself. You're assuming that Google staying in business is a good thing. Arguing against regulation of X because companies that have built a business around X being a certain way will go out of business necessitates that an explanation of why X continuing on in the same manner is in the interests of the general public.
  - danso 14y ago
    I agree, though I don't think I should be assumed to rely just on that fallacy. The problem here is that just because a law purports to serve an ideal doesn't meant that its side effects should just be waved off as a necessary evil. As an example, stopping terrorism is generally seen as a good thing, yet opinions differ on whether the laws that purport to prevent terrorism are good, and the government has also used such laws (such as e wire tapping allowances) to justify non-counter terrorism ops.
twoodfin 14y ago
There's already an easy way to keep any non-monopoly company from maximizing profit on your back: Don't do business with them.
- pyre 14y ago
  What about the companies that secretly collect information from you, but are not visible because they are included as JS/cookies/whatever on other sites?
- rwmj 14y ago
  What about my friends who upload and tag my photo on Facebook?
  - sanswork 14y ago
    If you weren't doing business with Facebook how would they be able to tag you?
    - Turing_Machine 14y ago
      Unless they've changed it recently, it's possible to use any name as a tag regardless of whether that individual is on Facebook. I know this because pictures of long-dead relatives posted by family members are tagged.
  - patrickg 14y ago
    Perhaps not so much about tagging the photo, but a) uploading a photo of me or b) giving facebook my email address (yes, thats common practice).
    - res0nat0r 14y ago
      That is your friends passing your info along without your consent, not Facebook breaking the law.
      - 14y ago
jnorthrop 14y ago
Think about what the "Right to be forgotten" means at a technical level. It means you need to permanently delete records from your databases -- not just mark them with a deleted flag as well as delete records from your backups and reports generated that may contain personal information. In addition your organization may also be held responsible for removal of data given to third parties. This is a big deal and it has many concerned over how it can be implemented as well as enforced.
- alexro 14y ago
  This means that the companies will not collect and maintain too much data about me to start with. There can be a reasonable amount of data - like name, DOB, address - that can stay public in any case. Other data will have to be deleted.
  - patrickg 14y ago
    Any kind of personal data must stay privat unless I decide that can be revealed/public. Name, DOB, and address are personal data. I must have the right to prevent companies giving my address away (public or other companies).
    - alexro 14y ago
      That'd be the ideal scenario I suppose.
- patrickg 14y ago
  I believe that this is the current situation in Germany and I assume other E.U. countries.
  - jnorthrop 14y ago
    It's debatable whether Germany's data protection laws include a right to be forgotten, but, in any case, it is not on the scale that is being proposed by the revised Data Directive. Other EU countries do not have the "right." What they do have, that exceeds protection in the US, is the right for many EU citizens to request a copy of all of the information a company has on an individual, as well as, in many cases, the requirement that a company gain explicit permission before collecting or sharing personal information.

danso 14y ago

I think "Sure, any regulation will have bad side effects" was the rallying cry of the SOPA backers

patrickg 14y ago
Good point :) I think my point is: "if we don't implement SOPA, we (the companies) are all gonna die!" Don't know how to express it in general, but I hope I can make my view clear.
pyre 14y ago
The point isn't "all regulation is good." The point is that "some companies will go out of business" isn't necessarily a good argument. To continue your SOPA connection, "Google will go out of business if SOPA is enacted," isn't a good argument in and of itself. You're assuming that Google staying in business is a good thing. Arguing against regulation of X because companies that have built a business around X being a certain way will go out of business necessitates that an explanation of why X continuing on in the same manner is in the interests of the general public.
- danso 14y ago
  I agree, though I don't think I should be assumed to rely just on that fallacy. The problem here is that just because a law purports to serve an ideal doesn't meant that its side effects should just be waved off as a necessary evil. As an example, stopping terrorism is generally seen as a good thing, yet opinions differ on whether the laws that purport to prevent terrorism are good, and the government has also used such laws (such as e wire tapping allowances) to justify non-counter terrorism ops.

twoodfin 14y ago

There's already an easy way to keep any non-monopoly company from maximizing profit on your back: Don't do business with them.

pyre 14y ago
What about the companies that secretly collect information from you, but are not visible because they are included as JS/cookies/whatever on other sites?
rwmj 14y ago
What about my friends who upload and tag my photo on Facebook?
- sanswork 14y ago
  If you weren't doing business with Facebook how would they be able to tag you?
  - Turing_Machine 14y ago
    Unless they've changed it recently, it's possible to use any name as a tag regardless of whether that individual is on Facebook. I know this because pictures of long-dead relatives posted by family members are tagged.
- patrickg 14y ago
  Perhaps not so much about tagging the photo, but a) uploading a photo of me or b) giving facebook my email address (yes, thats common practice).
  - res0nat0r 14y ago
    That is your friends passing your info along without your consent, not Facebook breaking the law.
    - 14y ago

jnorthrop 14y ago

Think about what the "Right to be forgotten" means at a technical level. It means you need to permanently delete records from your databases -- not just mark them with a deleted flag as well as delete records from your backups and reports generated that may contain personal information. In addition your organization may also be held responsible for removal of data given to third parties. This is a big deal and it has many concerned over how it can be implemented as well as enforced.

alexro 14y ago
This means that the companies will not collect and maintain too much data about me to start with. There can be a reasonable amount of data - like name, DOB, address - that can stay public in any case. Other data will have to be deleted.
- patrickg 14y ago
  Any kind of personal data must stay privat unless I decide that can be revealed/public. Name, DOB, and address are personal data. I must have the right to prevent companies giving my address away (public or other companies).
  - alexro 14y ago
    That'd be the ideal scenario I suppose.
patrickg 14y ago
I believe that this is the current situation in Germany and I assume other E.U. countries.
- jnorthrop 14y ago
  It's debatable whether Germany's data protection laws include a right to be forgotten, but, in any case, it is not on the scale that is being proposed by the revised Data Directive. Other EU countries do not have the "right." What they do have, that exceeds protection in the US, is the right for many EU citizens to request a copy of all of the information a company has on an individual, as well as, in many cases, the requirement that a company gain explicit permission before collecting or sharing personal information.