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

Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 506 posts

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#131

Post by KittenInABox »

Sargos wrote: post #98
hugi wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What utter nonsense. Facebook and Twitter will not turn themselves into protocols unless explicitly forced to do so by authorities. It's in their interest to be monopolies.

I didn't say they will turn themselves into protocols. The social protocols that are developed will displace those corporations over time as they provide more functionality with fewer restrictions.

This can only happen if we have strong anti-monopoly measures in place to prevent big tech from artificially smothering the competition in the crib.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#132

Post by PHGamer »

throwaway2245 wrote: post #86
munchbunny wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

GDPR is generally based on where the data is located That is not correct. Specifically, the counterexample is if you are a EU citizen living in an EU country and the actual bits are stored in a datacenter in Texas. GDPR still applies in this case, as long as the website owner accepts EU users. If the website specifically doesn't do business in the EU, things are different.

Ah, apologies, you're right to pick that up, it's not quite what I meant. Maybe "where the data originates" is better? Since the data originates where you are, the data has crossed a border to get to Texas and is therefore subject to GDPR (extra-territorially), I agree. If you were in Texas when that data was collected from you, and you returned to the EU, I doubt that GDPR would apply to that data.

gpdr on the other hand is tough to enforce on companies who wholly are in the US. from a sovereign perspective the EU can pound sand when telling Americans how to treat people in their own land.

The only reason the EU is able to get away with this to a degree is the american governments wish cooperation to a point and our treaties. However, I suspect america will only tolerate so much push from the EU.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#133

Post by cma »

dantheman wrote: post #104
hypertele-Xii wrote: post #23

Free exchange among peoples is alive and well. It is easier today to make a website and share anything than it has ever been in the history of civilization. All this is is the reining in of a few greedy corporations that offer information-sharing platforms in exchange for exploitation. New communities will pop up, and old ones resurface.

How are people being exploited? Where is the harm?

An algorithm optimizes for engagement, so you can't rebut a racist or conspiratorial post without de facto endorsing and spreading it.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#134

Post by ironmagma »

stickfigure wrote: post #11

This is the balkanization of the internet. We've lived through a brief period of free exchange among peoples, but it's soon over. I predict only one viable future for all technology companies, big and small: Pick a single national jurisdiction, keep your employees and servers inside it.

It’s more like de-globalization, which could very well be a good thing given the multitudes of problems that have arisen out of globalization.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#135

Post by anonymousab »

Sargos wrote: post #98
hugi wrote: post #90

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What utter nonsense. Facebook and Twitter will not turn themselves into protocols unless explicitly forced to do so by authorities. It's in their interest to be monopolies.

I didn't say they will turn themselves into protocols. The social protocols that are developed will displace those corporations over time as they provide more functionality with fewer restrictions.

The current tech giants will adopt what they can control and will crush whatever they can't. Either technologically, fiscally, politically, legislative or socially.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#136

Post by erhk »

filoleg wrote: post #115
dantheman wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How are people being exploited? Where is the harm?

They get shown ads that might be more relevant to them than just an ad picked at random, which might make them more likely to buy the product displayed in the ad. I guess that could lead to some extra harm to their wallets, but otherwise I am with you on this one.

The information necessary to do that is stored, could be used for other things in the future by that company, could be stolen, could be subpoena'd. It's also taken without explicit consent or explanation of what is recorded.

Bullets are just pieces of metal and gunpowder, why are you afraid of them?

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#137

Post by AmericanChopper »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #23

Free exchange among peoples is alive and well. It is easier today to make a website and share anything than it has ever been in the history of civilization. All this is is the reining in of a few greedy corporations that offer information-sharing platforms in exchange for exploitation. New communities will pop up, and old ones resurface.

That’s the political pitch. It’s really just the EU trying to challenge the economic dominance of US tech companies. Tariffs and trade barriers are unpopular, and people who implement them are supposedly very bad. But privacy regulation and huge fines for big tech are very popular, and the people who implement them are supposedly very good. When people see the fines given out I think they presume the regulations are achieving their publicly stated purpose, but really all they are is tariffs in disguise.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#139

Post by ku-man »

Traster wrote: post #111
stickfigure wrote: post #11

This is the balkanization of the internet. We've lived through a brief period of free exchange among peoples, but it's soon over. I predict only one viable future for all technology companies, big and small: Pick a single national jurisdiction, keep your employees and servers inside it.

This is absolutely not what's happening here though. Facebook absolutely could keep the data within the EU, they just think it's more profitable to move UK user data to California. Now, it's a valid question as to why the UK would allow their constituents most personal data to be transferred out of their jurisdiction, but that's up to the UK government. Facebook exists in hundreds of jurisdictions, it's not rare for…

The UK can't and won't fight US (in any matter)

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#140

Post by yarg »

stickfigure wrote: post #11

This is the balkanization of the internet. We've lived through a brief period of free exchange among peoples, but it's soon over. I predict only one viable future for all technology companies, big and small: Pick a single national jurisdiction, keep your employees and servers inside it.

The problem is people expect all things to be free (beer).

Naturally there's a cost to all things: developers need to eat; they need a work/life balance.

Unless there's financial backing for a concept or project it will have a hard time getting off the ground.

And unless there's some corporate interest in what's being worked on it simply won't be written.

The best hope is open-source outreach not as benevolence, but as part of a large company's recruitment policy.

One thing I'd like to see is Microsoft licensing Firefox's backend, and allowing the user to chose which engine to use.

Chromium might have some major advantages, but user privacy (and ultimately experience) will never be a part of it - we need to stop relying on corporations that have intentions that are ultimately adversarial to the end user.

Will that ever happen? Fuck no - Microsoft already bundles adware into their $300 operating system.

Post reply on HN