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

Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

321–330 of 447 posts

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#321

Post by Nasrudith »

gdfasfklshg4 wrote: post #303
DontTellAnyone wrote: post #286

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The thousands of Euros spent on lawyers and development time to become compliant, plus all the time wasted. Really a great accomplishment by the EU... in addition to clicking a shitty "I accept cookies" banner on every damn website I visit, I now frequently also have to click another popup for GDPR and multiple checkboxes for GDPR when I signup somewhere. As if anyone ever bothered reading those. As far as I'm concer…

As far as I'm concerned the GDPR is great regulation that puts people before corporations.

What does that even get you concretely? It is marketted nice but ultimately the "GDPR pop up" is a pathological failure case for every party involved.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#322

Post by [deleted] »

Crosseye_Jack wrote: post #294
iso947 wrote: post #279

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s not obvious if a site is geolocked. I know Bbc is blocked in China from experience, but I wouldn’t expect that others would know. Hacker news is available in China (at least last time I was there).

The difference between BBC blocked in China and Chicago Tribune blocked in the EU I’m my opinion is CT actively block the EU because they don’t want to deal with the GDPR but China blocking the BBC is a decision outside of the BBC’s control.

[deleted]

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#323

Post by deaps »

nannal wrote: post #316
Hermel wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s certainly much cheaper to simply block European users than to pay a lawyer to tell you what you need to change and then pay a programmer to implement these changes. Blocking the few European users is probably the right decision from an economic perspective.

Then I'm going to vote with my European wallet and commit not to visit sites that block me. Let's see just how much they like that.

That'll show 'em

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#324

Post by pingyong »

Hermel wrote: post #289
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #245

"Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism." It's 2020 and american websites still go the "We'd rather block you alltogether than te…

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

What I'm wondering about is: If you're not targeting an EU-audience, and you therefore might not even have servers in the EU, and certainly don't have EU-based revenue streams - why do you even care? Can an EU court even do anything in this situation?

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#325

Post by pingyong »

nannal wrote: post #316
Hermel wrote: post #302

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It’s certainly much cheaper to simply block European users than to pay a lawyer to tell you what you need to change and then pay a programmer to implement these changes. Blocking the few European users is probably the right decision from an economic perspective.

Then I'm going to vote with my European wallet and commit not to visit sites that block me. Let's see just how much they like that.

They literally intentionally blocked you... that's kinda what they expect to happen lol.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#326

Post by Crosseye_Jack »

iso947 wrote: post #297
Crosseye_Jack wrote: post #294

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The difference between BBC blocked in China and Chicago Tribune blocked in the EU I’m my opinion is CT actively block the EU because they don’t want to deal with the GDPR but China blocking the BBC is a decision outside of the BBC’s control.

But how do I, as a resident of Brazil, know that CT is blocked in Europe?

I was just comparing the two sites. I'm not saying Geo-Blocked sites should be banned on HN, As I said in another comment, I think the same rule that applies to paywalls should be applied to to sites that geoblock themselves (Not being geoblocked by a goverment which the BBC is in China).

If their are workaround for a paywalled site then its allowed on HN. So if their are workaround for the geoblocking (outline, google cache, archive.today, etc)then I think they should be allowed.

As for how you will know if a sit is blocked, the same way people find out about soft paywalls, the comments will tell you. Its not like a crime to post paywalled sites to HN.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#327

Post by gdfasfklshg4 »

Nasrudith wrote: post #321
gdfasfklshg4 wrote: post #303

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As far as I'm concerned the GDPR is great regulation that puts people before corporations.

What does that even get you concretely? It is marketted nice but ultimately the "GDPR pop up" is a pathological failure case for every party involved.

The GDPR pop up is NOT just a pop up (not if you are following the law). If you are a data controller and you believe that the GDPR is just a pointless pop up you should consult your lawyer and see what they say.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#328

Post by lloeki »

pingyong wrote: post #324
Hermel wrote: post #289

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Apparently, compliance with GDPR is not worth the hassle for websites that target a non-European audience.

What I'm wondering about is: If you're not targeting an EU-audience, and you therefore might not even have servers in the EU, and certainly don't have EU-based revenue streams - why do you even care? Can an EU court even do anything in this situation?

IIUC, you can be a US expat living in the EU and the GDPR still applies.

Even then a non-EU company may not explicitly target a EU audience but EU moral or physical person may still find interest for whatever personal reason and still be protected by GDPR.

As for jurisdiction, I suppose such conflicts are resolved using international law, but if a company is reachable from the EU by individuals protected by EU laws I’m pretty sure there is applicable jurisdiction (not saying it’s an easy thing)

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#329

Post by perl4ever »

guelo wrote: post #142
perl4ever wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think it makes a whole lot of sense to talk about "assassinating" soldiers any more than "terrorist attacks" on them. Those are things done to civilians by definition. We certainly don't want to promote the idea that "collateral damage" is necessary for a military operation to be ethical. I think terrorism has a perfectly good definition - political lobbying/influence "by other means" than conventional politi…

If we killed some European general that was visiting some European country you would say that we had assassinated him.

"Visiting...some European country"

So, that's who this general was, an Iranian visiting some Iranian country? Was he there to see the fjords?

Anyway, telling me what I would think or say is unacceptable in a civil conversation. If I write something, you can assume I mean it, or you can disengage if you think I'm trolling.

If you're going to take my comments as justifying US actions, perhaps they can be taken that way, but they may apply to retaliation as well, no? Is there much of a gray area with military personnel in Iraq right now, who aren't Iraqis?

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#330

Post by cosmodisk »

unknown_library wrote: post #305
tjoff wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, the burden of not exploiting their users really is a huge undertaking.

GDPR adds a lot of regulatory red tape to things that were previously simple. It is not only for nefarious reasons that you might want to avoid GDPR. Want to store logs? Now you need to make sure you're scrubbing any type of personal information from the logs. Want to use a third-party service? Now you need to make sure that you are using their GDPR-compliant plan, and that you are using their Amsterdam endpoints. Ma…

https://temp-mail.org/privacy-policy

Have a look at the list of companies and other websites this service uses/shares data with.

No wonder some websites rather block users all together instead of showing that they are selling data left and right.

Post reply on HN