Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 94 posts

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#71

Post by Marysville »

kossTKR wrote: post #7

While GDPR in itself has accomplished the goal of raising awareness on data security and transparency, probably only temporarily, the mind numbingly idiotic push-button based consent model is an utter failure. 99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle have to read through. It's an extension of th…

But now you also have. "No I do not consent" buttons. If people are tired of it, they should just stick with 'No'.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#72

Post by cfadvan »

vorpalhex wrote: post #47
dbasedweeb wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle has to read through. No offense, but this feels like a “99%” and “most” that is something less than rigorous. I don’t think sound arguments for or against GDPR can come from the “Ah Reckon” space. Throwing out made-up numbers that just represent personal…

> I’d add that GDPR explicitly forbids just the kind of “press yes to forfeit all of your rights” crap we’ve seen before. I realize that some sites are still trying to get away with it, it it’s non-compliant. I have yet to see a non-terrible GDPR screen, and I'm an American. Every single one so far has been either a giant box of doom, or a giant modal of doom with a dozen checkboxes and a freakin' contract on it. Nop…

The Atlantic has a great system, and it’s all opt-in as required by GDPR.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#73

Post by phicoh »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #32
imustbeevil wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.

> I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers Nobody disagrees with GDPR's intent. The qualm is with its administrative approach. If someone said "write a bailout for lawyers and lobbyists," it would look like GDPR. Taking your analogy, a good law would assess a fine for dumping. A bad law would (a) require continuous certification that one is not dumping and (b) allow anyone to prompt an expensive insp…

Maybe it comes as a surprise, but there are places where if you generate industrial waste (even as a relatively small company) you have to be able to demonstrate that you get rid it in a responsible way. And if somebody complains with a local government that you are dumping waste in a particular way, they will send somebody over to investigate.

Note that the European consumer protection laws already allow consumers to sue in their own country. So if you do business in all EU country, you can be sued in lots of places.

Maybe if you are continuously worried about regulators, then it is better to not start a business. In the real world, regulators are busy enough. Regulators are not going to bother random companies in other countries just for the fun of it.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#74

Post by Jyaif »

elcapitan wrote: post #30
hshehehjdjdjd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The only difference is that dumping toxic waste in rivers does actual, concrete harm. Targeted advertising? The worst I’ve heard about it is that it makes some people feel a little icky. I suppose that’s a concrete harm in a sense but it seems a much less serious one, at least to me.

> The worst I’ve heard about it is that it makes some people feel a little icky. The worst I've heard of was the abuse of millions of people's data by Cambridge Analytics to mess with an election, but maybe that's just a little icky too?

Your usage of "abuse" is offensive to people that really experienced abuse.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#75

Post by tomatotomato37 »

imustbeevil wrote: post #5
echelon wrote: post #3

GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.

I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.

It's not the technical aspect of not dumping into rivers that is the problem, its the administrative side of dealing with paperwork and inspectors verifying your business which is located 100 miles from the nearest river doesn't dump into a river

In my opinion the GDPR should have tiered regulations based on global revenue. It's pretty hard to profit off of data and not have some sort of cash flow

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#76

Post by adventured »

cheald wrote: post #70
adventured wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It doesn't matter what the EU purports, that's nothing more than a comical fantasy on their part. I live in the US, my business operates in the US, I operate by US law. It also doesn't matter what China purports I should do with their citizen data, or South Africa, or Australia, or Brazil: their wishes don't overrule the supremacy of US law inside the US. If China wants me to delete everything on my service about Tia…

I'd like to think that you're right, but I also don't want to be the guy that has to spend several hundred thousand dollars to defend that thesis in court.

I'm happy to be that guy: the EU doesn't stand a chance and they know it.

It's not a thesis, it's proven, court established rule of law with more than a century of built-up precedence establishing how things actually work when it comes to US sovereignty. This is all quite laughable.

It's identical to saying: well, the US is just going to enforce its freedom of speech approach on Germany or the UK (where offending people is increasingly illegal). So all people and businesses in those nations should disregard their own laws and comply with US laws, you don't want to test the thesis about just how far US jurisdiction extends, better to comply with US freedom of speech laws instead.

Imagine me traveling to Britain and telling them that since I'm an American, their speech laws don't apply to me. I'm governed by US speech laws, regardless of where I'm at. That'd be good for a jolly laugh: look at this delusional, entitled American that thinks they control the planet. Or try telling the Chinese the same thing on their territory.

There are millions of small businesses in the US, very few of them will ever comply with GDPR - even if they have occasional stray EU customers - precisely because the EU has no jurisdiction and those businesses don't operate by EU law.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#77

Post by JumpCrisscross »

falcolas wrote: post #52
JumpCrisscross wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's part of the cost of doing business. In a jurisdiction. GDPR means a dollar can buy more MVPs outside Europe than inside. Keep in mind that this has no bearing on the privacy stance of the ultimate product. Just the fixed cost of iteration.

I hate to break it to you, but the idea behind the GDPR is gaining traction outside the Europe. Fighting this trend is only going to hurt more in the long run.

> the idea behind the GDPR is gaining traction outside the Europe

I hope it does. Europe, however, has a unique penchant for unnecessary bureaucracy. Nobody is complaining about GDPR’s requirements. It’s the ancillary administration which is destructive.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#79

Post by maccard »

Marysville wrote: post #71
kossTKR wrote: post #7

While GDPR in itself has accomplished the goal of raising awareness on data security and transparency, probably only temporarily, the mind numbingly idiotic push-button based consent model is an utter failure. 99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle have to read through. It's an extension of th…

But now you also have. "No I do not consent" buttons. If people are tired of it, they should just stick with 'No'.

No, you have "Click Here to manage your settings" with 10 different pop ups and laundry lists of people you can opt out of having your data shared with. Some of those require you to disable cookies to opt out of their collection too, rather than allowing you to opt out via them.

Re: Google Emerges as Early Winner from Europe’s New Data Privacy Law

#80

Post by matthewmacleod »

caffeine5150 wrote: post #54
matthewmacleod wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Please give us more details of what you think the administrative burden is, because I think you have overestimated it. Being able to provide a user with the data you have on them, and being able to delete it, should be basic requirements of any software company. And now they are, which is great.

I'm an attorney leading (from a legal standpoint) a SaaS provider's GDPR compliance effort. There most definitely is an administrative burden (setting aside whether you think that burden is merited). The SaaS provider is acting as a processor for its business customers (so fewer obligations than if it were controller) and there are many admin requirements. The GDPR is an accountability framework and one must be prepa…

There is obviously an administrative burden, I don't deny that. I don't think it can reasonably be described as "massive".
Post reply on HN