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

Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

trofire.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 203 posts

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#81

Post by jashmatthews »

tarr11 wrote: post #41

Is personal information really a kind of property, that can be stolen? If it is, aren’t we doing this all the time, any time we perceive anything about anyone? How is this different than taking a picture of someone? The image is owned by the photographer, not the subject(s) according to current laws. if I meet someone on the street, and record their name, the conversation we had, and the location where I met them, an…

This analogy breaks down immediately in other countries.

In Germany, people have some claim to the copyright of their own image, much in line with the German view that you own your private information.

https://www.co-berlin.org/en/watch-out

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#82

Post by StellarTabi »

dmix wrote: post #75
fzeroracer wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering right now companies like Facebook are very actively making the world a worse place I would say this would be a strong move towards something better.

The rules always get written to control the big companies like FB, despite the fact the laws effect the whole marketplace of thousands of companies of different sizes. But big companies like FB have enough lawyers and influence and never really change. Meanwhile the laws cripple all sorts of harmless small-medium sized companies, including potential future better competitors to FB. And the laws stay law for decades b…

> The rules always get written to control the big companies like FB, despite the fact the laws effect the whole marketplace of thousands of companies of different sizes.

Yup, and this is why campaign finance reform is so important.

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#83

Post by Apocryphon »

fzeroracer wrote: post #71
Apocryphon wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's a terrifying possibility. Are there any actual case studies and examples of tech startups being killed by regulation? Or is this a campfire story that is retold whenever the possibility of regulation is mentioned.

The inherent nature of regulations mean there is always going to be a 'winner' and a 'loser'. For example I have no doubts that regulations removing lead from gasoline resulted in lost profits and hurt businesses, but we can also believe that the societal gains were far greater than the losses. Similarly regulations in favor of privacy for citizens is going to naturally result in some companies, somewhere, having to…

I completely agree. I was referring to the GP's framing of the situation as Big Bad Regulation squashing Mom & Pop tech startups- a bogeyman of dubious existence.

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#84

Post by Apocryphon »

dmix wrote: post #75
fzeroracer wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Considering right now companies like Facebook are very actively making the world a worse place I would say this would be a strong move towards something better.

The rules always get written to control the big companies like FB, despite the fact the laws effect the whole marketplace of thousands of companies of different sizes. But big companies like FB have enough lawyers and influence and never really change. Meanwhile the laws cripple all sorts of harmless small-medium sized companies, including potential future better competitors to FB. And the laws stay law for decades b…

> There are countless examples of this in other industries.

But do you have an actual example of this happening in tech? And beyond that, a series of examples showing this to be a systemic problem? Because high-tech has long been a Wild West with little regulation, and many many firms have been built upon finding ways to dodge existing regulation and social conventions. They will likely be fine.

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#85

Post by boudin »

fzeroracer wrote: post #48
srkmno wrote: post #26

Pitchfork mobs dictating policy, that is why you don't elect an ex state attorney general to the legislative branch: prosecution and grandstanding is all they know. Also the principle concept of "stealing your data" is more ludicrous than "stealing" in the copyright sense; that data is meta data and it's not yours, it was generated by machines you don't own and have no claim over.

Let's say someone really hates Facebook. What exactly is their recourse for them to say 'I don't want you to keep a shadow profile and I don't want you to sell or use that in any way shape for form'. In that case, they're directly monetizing data about me as a person.

I wonder if it is possible to licence myself, the same way a software, for example, is licenced. Meaning that any company like facebook monetizing data whithout any agreement between me and them would fall under my licence. I have absolutly no legal knowledge and i have no idea what could be enforced this way. I'm also sure that nothing could be done by one person because of the need to lawyer up to enforce anything... But if it could be possible and would gain enough momentum, I'm thinking it could be quite an interesting thing to do.

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#86

Post by crooked-v »

srkmno wrote: post #79
crooked-v wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> that data is meta data and it's not yours, it was generated by machines you don't own and have no claim over I'm pretty sure that, for example, the list of grocery brands someone buys using a store loyalty card isn't "metadata", and while "stealing" is hyperbole, I'm pretty sure most people would be upset upon realizing how far and wide that information is being sold.

Zealots would be upset sure but I'd argue most people won't. A shopping list is metadata and the issue here is data ownership, you can't own a shopping list, you can't even copyright one, if you don't want it to be associated with you, you should be able to opt out, but no one should be burned at the stake for it.

> you should be able to opt out

Why should it be "opted in" automatically in the first place?

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#87

Post by Apocryphon »

srkmno wrote: post #76
Apocryphon wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is the tip of the iceberg. For every bad story about Facebook there's at least a dozen about Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Uber, AirBnB, and smaller players. Regulation designed to rein in the heavy hitters will not harm small startups, especially ones whose innovation is built upon careful flouting of law and loophole-seeking, anyway.

Regulation as the result of "bad stories" yeah let heysteria and sensationalism lead the way. Facebook et al are not the source of all evil, they are actually a source of financial relief to most people, they are only a problem to media companies, and those who write books about how bad they are. It's healthcare and housing costs that are the bane of everyday people, this media fabricated tech backlash is a strategic…

> Regulation as the result of "bad stories" yeah let heysteria and sensationalism lead the way.

That's literally how muckrakers during the Progressive Era alerted the public to the depredations of big business and forced government regulation of business practices to ensure competition and free enterprise.

And how does any social media company provide "financial relief"?

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#88

Post by srkmno »

crooked-v wrote: post #86
srkmno wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Zealots would be upset sure but I'd argue most people won't. A shopping list is metadata and the issue here is data ownership, you can't own a shopping list, you can't even copyright one, if you don't want it to be associated with you, you should be able to opt out, but no one should be burned at the stake for it.

> you should be able to opt out Why should it be "opted in" automatically in the first place?

Because if you really care about it you have the option, otherwise it's a valuable resource that should be put to use.

Re: Proposed Jail Time for Tech Companies Who Steal Data

#89

Post by betterunix2 »

Apocryphon wrote: post #62
srkmno wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Facebook is people and people suck. Facebook is also a scapegoat and to the contrary of what a resentful media industry would like you to believe the sum of their contributions to the world is overwhelmingly positive

Facebook is the tip of the iceberg. For every bad story about Facebook there's at least a dozen about Google, Amazon, Microsoft, Apple, Uber, AirBnB, and smaller players. Regulation designed to rein in the heavy hitters will not harm small startups, especially ones whose innovation is built upon careful flouting of law and loophole-seeking, anyway.

Except that in practice regulation nearly typically protects big incumbents from startup competitors. That is exactly the effect GDPR had in Europe:

https://techcrunch.com/2018/10/09/gdpr-has-cut-ad-trackers-i...

Incumbents, especially in the tech industry, face a greater threat of being unseated by a startup than being unable to handle regulations. The "heavy hitters" have plenty of cash available to pay for the lawyers needed to deal with regulations, and the lobbyists needed to shape regulations to their advantage. Startups need to be careful about their budgets, and the added cost of compliance represents an entry cost that will almost certainly work against small players.

Moreover, when you regulate to the point where the big incumbents suffer economically, you are typically in a state of over-regulation. The evidence is very clear that numerous freight railroads failed in the 1960s because over-regulation prevented them from adapting to new realities; it was too difficult for the railroads to shut down unprofitable routes due to service requirements and they were required to continue paying taxes and maintenance costs on redundant infrastructure. Following deregulation (the Staggers Act) America's freight rail industry was able to reorganize and become profitable once again (and today the North American freight network is one of the most efficient systems on earth and is envied by the world). Passenger railroads are still uneconomical even in regions with high population densities that are absolutely dependent on passenger service (e.g. the northeast corridor, which is the ideal scenario and home to some of the only services that manage an operating surplus) largely because of persistent over-regulation (especially safety -- Acela trainsets are significantly heavier than comparable equipment in Europe and Asia and are more expensive to operate).

Good regulation is certainly possible, but it is the exception rather than the rule. The more typical pattern is either the economic failure of an industry (over-regulation) or regulatory capture.

Post reply on HN