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

The European Union versus the Internet

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

111–120 of 211 posts

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#111

Post by tensor »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #86
Tharkun wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the GDPR "success story" part of your comment. So far it's backfired entirely. The goal was to provide users with more control, and (from the standpoint of such a user) to reduce relentless personal data harvesting. That hasn't happened. What's happened is more annoying "we use cookies and track you"-banners all over the internet. As a user who doesn't use cookies, these damned things won't even go aw…

AIUI the "allow being tracked to gain access" is unlawful.

Is it ok to say "you get a discount if you allow being tracked"? As a practical matter, these places need to earn money to exist, so either you get served ads or you pay directly. It's highly unreasonable to expect free service.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#112

Post by Aunche »

tomp wrote: post #100
Tharkun wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the GDPR "success story" part of your comment. So far it's backfired entirely. The goal was to provide users with more control, and (from the standpoint of such a user) to reduce relentless personal data harvesting. That hasn't happened. What's happened is more annoying "we use cookies and track you"-banners all over the internet. As a user who doesn't use cookies, these damned things won't even go aw…

Yea, I agree. AFAIK GDPR does explicitly legislate against all that - dialogues should be "opt-in" and should include a simple "no" option, and that sites shouldn't "ban" you for not clicking "yes". But unless EU actually starts delivering some hefty fines, the law is just a dead tree.

> GDPR does explicitly legislate against all that - dialogues should be "opt-in"

That's can't be a real part of GDPR, can it? I don't see how you can fine someone for shitty website design.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#113

Post by phobosdeimos »

kodablah wrote: post #3

> This brings me to a piece of legislation I have been very critical of for quite some time: GDPR. The intent of the legislation is certainly admirable — protect consumer privacy —although (and this may be the American in me speaking) I am perhaps a bit skeptical about just how much most consumers care relative to elites in the media. Amen. The way Google and FB are using data just doesn't bother the masses the way i…

Lol you technologists are payed by advertising money. Inconvenient truth.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#114

Post by Bjartr »

tensor wrote: post #111
pbhjpbhj wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

AIUI the "allow being tracked to gain access" is unlawful.

Is it ok to say "you get a discount if you allow being tracked"? As a practical matter, these places need to earn money to exist, so either you get served ads or you pay directly. It's highly unreasonable to expect free service.

And the GDPR says "good riddance to you if you can only make money by tracking people without the tracking itself being part of your value to them".

Not all business models deserve to succeed.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#115

Post by craftyguy »

AdamM12 wrote: post #110
tomp wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I agree. AFAIK GDPR does explicitly legislate against all that - dialogues should be "opt-in" and should include a simple "no" option, and that sites shouldn't "ban" you for not clicking "yes". But unless EU actually starts delivering some hefty fines, the law is just a dead tree.

How do you suppose the site make money off their visits? To me what you want sounds like freeloading.

You seem to have no problem 'freeloading' HN.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#116

Post by sleavey »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #97
Tharkun wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the GDPR "success story" part of your comment. So far it's backfired entirely. The goal was to provide users with more control, and (from the standpoint of such a user) to reduce relentless personal data harvesting. That hasn't happened. What's happened is more annoying "we use cookies and track you"-banners all over the internet. As a user who doesn't use cookies, these damned things won't even go aw…

You may be interested in http://prebake.eu/ to block them.

"By using these filters, you are allowing sites to set cookies by default, without you first being notified, and are agreeing to allow the sites you visit to set cookies."

Does lack of interaction with a (blocked) cookie banner give implicit consent to be tracked?

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#117

Post by the_gipsy »

Aunche wrote: post #112
tomp wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yea, I agree. AFAIK GDPR does explicitly legislate against all that - dialogues should be "opt-in" and should include a simple "no" option, and that sites shouldn't "ban" you for not clicking "yes". But unless EU actually starts delivering some hefty fines, the law is just a dead tree.

> GDPR does explicitly legislate against all that - dialogues should be "opt-in" That's can't be a real part of GDPR, can it? I don't see how you can fine someone for shitty website design.

They should, in theory, fine websites that do install cookies before you give consent, or refuse to give sevice that doesn’t strictly require cookies (e.g. an article).

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#118

Post by nybble41 »

FactolSarin wrote: post #19

I disagree with the EU about their copyright legislation, but applaud their attempts at increasing privacy. What I find odd about the conversation around EU internet legislation is the idea that "The Internet" is a single entity that has some kind of natural state, and further that natural state is for all information to be free and to be a place where anyone can say anything (or should be able to). I think this grow…

> ... and those countries have a right to implement those decisions for their people on the Internet ...

No, they do not. One's natural rights do not disappear just because one happens to be living under a regime which fails to acknowledge them. When an American talks about the freedom of speech, they're talking about a right shared by every human being on this planet, not just the ones who happen to live in the USA. It is a matter of objective fact, not opinion or local preference, that the use of force, including fines, imprisonment, etc., is not a proportional response to mere speech, regardless of the content.

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#119

Post by DavidVoid »

MiddleEndian wrote: post #97
Tharkun wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I disagree with the GDPR "success story" part of your comment. So far it's backfired entirely. The goal was to provide users with more control, and (from the standpoint of such a user) to reduce relentless personal data harvesting. That hasn't happened. What's happened is more annoying "we use cookies and track you"-banners all over the internet. As a user who doesn't use cookies, these damned things won't even go aw…

You may be interested in http://prebake.eu/ to block them.

Or alternatively https://www.i-dont-care-about-cookies.eu/

Re: The European Union versus the Internet

#120

Post by timrichard »

pbhjpbhj wrote: post #95
Joeri wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my view, in Europe there is a bigger pressure to value people/individuals over company/corporate interest and that's seems like the crux of the difference. I think it’s more about two different definitions of freedom. The U.S. defines it as the freedom to choose, where harmful outcomes are an accident of letting people freely choose. The E.U. sees it more as the freedom to live, where choices that harm quality of…

I'm going to guess you're not from Europe based on that definition? The EU constrains companies to the benefit of individuals. It's not stopping people from hurting themselves, it's stopping them from being hurt by companies who have phenomenal power over us, more power in some ways than states themselves have.

There are over 30,000 [1] paid lobbyists in Brussels, and you think "the EU constrains companies to the benefit of individuals". And these latest outrageous copyright and link proposals are widely regarded to be for the benefit of certain German media magnates.

Whatever criticism the EU attracts for its spending, the PR budget looks to be pretty good value. I'm really baffled by some of these perspectives.

[1] https://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/08/lobbyists-euro...

Post reply on HN