srkmno

9 ms·

31.
by srkmno 8y ago
Ah, the oft invoked "cultural difference" excuse for protectionism.
32.
by srkmno 8y ago
What's "unethical" here is shifting and narrowing legal definitions to target certain companies originating from certain countries.
33.
by srkmno 8y ago
The euros' incentives are clear, what's our government's incentive to destroy some of our most innovative, successful, and market defining companies?
34.
by srkmno 8y ago
"bad stuff" is not the exclusive purview of US companies, nor does this example qualify. One accomplishment of theirs is convincing some naive Americans that selectively punishing US firms and chipping away at US influence and mi
35.
by srkmno 8y ago
What exactly does "almost certainly" mean? And I thought this was about antitrust? Or is it a "whatever it takes" sort of policy enforcement? Not to mention that this was before the Germans got ungrateful and tampered wi
36.
Deep Fakes: Let's Not Go Off the Deep End(techdirt.com)
1 points by srkmno 8y ago|0 comments
37.
by srkmno 8y ago
You're suggesting that the law shouldn't apply to the competitors of US companies because you worked for one of them and feel sympathetic?! That says a lot about the community makeup and voting pattern on HN.
38.
by srkmno 8y ago
This can't be accurately called "collusion" since it's not a secret, it's still a cartel thought but lucky for them EU regulators have eyes only for US companies.
39.
US Newspapers Now Salivating Over Bringing a Google Snippet Tax Stateside(techdirt.com)
3 points by srkmno 8y ago|0 comments
40.
by srkmno 8y ago
So how many individuals and organizations do I need to get permission from to install something on my phone? All these privacy histrionics are supplanting all other individual rights, personal accountability has to break out of this permiss
41.
by srkmno 8y ago
Who exactly is the "us" and "we" in this scenario?
42.
by srkmno 8y ago
What does any of that mean? my point is against imposing one's POV on others and that people are free to consent to stuff you might not like.
43.
by srkmno 8y ago
How is that a scam? are you saying participants didn't receive their gift cards? are the terms agreed to false?
44.
by srkmno 8y ago
Yeah what's the exact text that says that? Besides this isn't portrayed as an apple terms mismatch story it clearly reads as another pearl clutching privacy panic clickbait.
45.
by srkmno 8y ago
So what? it's opt-in, is consent not enough anymore? does a privacy maximalist mentality needs to be imposed on everyone?
46.
by srkmno 8y ago
I don't understand what's so objectionable here? there is ample disclosure, it's for adults, and those who opt in receive rewards, is this really about everyone being concerned for apple's terms or is it just that it&#x2
47.
Who Benefited from FOSTA? (Spoiler: Probably No One)(blog.ericgoldman.org)
1 points by srkmno 8y ago|0 comments
48.
by srkmno 8y ago
This is exceedingly petty even considering that the GDPR as a whole is a tool to subject US tech firms to a degree of scrutiny and control that would suffocate other industries and extract the occasional payout. No one benefits from this, t
49.
by srkmno 8y ago
Which roughly translates to: "competing devices are too cheap".
50.
New York Times misinterpreted what “access” means in latest Facebook freakout(arstechnica.com)
1 points by srkmno 8y ago|0 comments
51.
by srkmno 8y ago
I don't think that's it, it's not just about pointing out hypocrisy or anything vapid like that, Congresspeople were grandstanding against the move. It's all just out of proportion somehow.
52.
by srkmno 8y ago
It's what all companies there are required to do and the Chinese people accept it, and a lot of them welcome the social credit system (according to reporting on the program) it's arrogant to to presume we know what's best for
53.
by srkmno 8y ago
Never really understood why Google running a search engine in China is controversial, it wouldn't be the first US company doing business there, nor the first to censor due to local laws (Apple censors their app store etc) and it's
54.
by srkmno 8y ago
The necessary song and dance to start a process that in a year and change will cost Google a "record fine". That what happens when the unofficale mandate is to counter the success of US tech companies in the eurozone: first endow
55.
by srkmno 8y ago
Then why not give newspapers the same protection if that is the issue, it's preferable to throwing the baby with bathwater so to speak.