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

EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 171 posts

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#131

Post by KDJohnBrown »

kreeben wrote: post #32
KDJohnBrown wrote: post #29

What the EU should really do is fine / tax monopolists like Google and Facebook into submission then invest that money into the EU-based startup ecosystem.

Targeting taxes directly towards specific companies seems overly aggressive. I hope they will find and implement more generic rules to achieve what it is they want to achieve which, if I'm not completely mistaken, is to protect me from invasive tracking.

Is this really any different than the USA banning Huawei to prevent 5G carrier equipment competition under the guise of “national security”?

(Edited to clarify 5G carrier equipment competition)

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#132

Post by qertoip »

1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #126
yulaow wrote: post #5

At this point honestly I just wish for a general ban on tracking ads of any kind. Just give me good old contextual ads and remove some MBs of js, with the only purpose of tracking me, from most websites of the internet.

Just disable Javascript. If people did this en masse, even for one day, the adtech companies would start to panic. Castles made of sand.

That would help but tracking would still be possible through HTTP layer like resource caching and other headers.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#133

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

qertoip wrote: post #132
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just disable Javascript. If people did this en masse, even for one day, the adtech companies would start to panic. Castles made of sand.

That would help but tracking would still be possible through HTTP layer like resource caching and other headers.

I control the HTTP layer with a forward proxy. Works well.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#134

Post by KDJohnBrown »

beaconstudios wrote: post #64
KDJohnBrown wrote: post #29

What the EU should really do is fine / tax monopolists like Google and Facebook into submission then invest that money into the EU-based startup ecosystem.

ah yes, protectionism.

If you want to see the outcome of a lack of protectionism, look no further than the devastation of the steel, automobile and other manufacturing industries in the ‘70s and ‘80s which effectively wiped out the middle class.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#135

Post by beaconstudios »

KDJohnBrown wrote: post #134
beaconstudios wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

ah yes, protectionism.

If you want to see the outcome of a lack of protectionism, look no further than the devastation of the steel, automobile and other manufacturing industries in the ‘70s and ‘80s which effectively wiped out the middle class.

hey I'm no fan of naked neoliberalism either, but I promise you an EU facebook would suck just as much and in the same ways as US facebook. Profit motives still exist for huge corporations in Europe.

every tool has its use, but protectionism is not the way to solve big tech's bad incentives.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#136

Post by eternalban »

qertoip wrote: post #104
yulaow wrote: post #5

At this point honestly I just wish for a general ban on tracking ads of any kind. Just give me good old contextual ads and remove some MBs of js, with the only purpose of tracking me, from most websites of the internet.

"ban, ban, ban, ban, ban" - what a great idea to improve the world.

You're reducing the equation to an unreasonable degree.

Parameters are:

- negative effects on society at-large

- destruction of privacy

- creation of turn-key surveillance systems

- negative effects on urban environment aesthetics

- ...

- legitimate business desire to promote goods and services.

It's that sole last item, which is the entire stated purpose of "advertising". We could create a web just for product promotion, and it would be opt in. Looking for widget x? Go to the market and even provide demographics for better service.

Advertising is a pretext for baking in surveillance and social modification systems into society. It is, like certain aspects of financial system, 'sacrosanct', and it is strictly taboo to state the obvious regarding advertising, as a systemic approach to moderating societal norms and behavior.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#137

Post by maedla »

qertoip wrote: post #104
yulaow wrote: post #5

At this point honestly I just wish for a general ban on tracking ads of any kind. Just give me good old contextual ads and remove some MBs of js, with the only purpose of tracking me, from most websites of the internet.

"ban, ban, ban, ban, ban" - what a great idea to improve the world.

yes

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#138

Post by maedla »

Nasrudith wrote: post #117
jorge-d wrote: post #8

Earlier quoted context omitted.

By setting very high fines for those who don't comply?

That is like saying if we make the punishment for any crime tortorous enough we won't need law enforcement. That only answers "what the punishment will theoretically be" not "How can it be found out when it is being broken? By whom? Will we able to take action against it?".

Oh heaven help us if a trillion dollar enterprise gets a fine !!!!

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#139

Post by filoleg »

matheusmoreira wrote: post #129
filoleg wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Never thought I would see the day when people on HN would enthusiastically support making it much more difficult for anyone to publish their stuff on the web. All while, in the same breath, clamoring for the "good old days" of the web when publishing something was as easy as just uploading a folder with your HTML/CSS to your host. No, thank you, I don't want to go through audits and deal with bureaucracy when I just…

Well, in the good old days people didn't abuse users with unwanted tracking and fingerprinting. Pages used to be just that: files someone uploaded to the internet. People came up with tracking techniques here and there but they weren't so pervasive. Now most pages aren't pages, they're hostile applications purposefully built to extract as much value out of you as they can by any means available whether you want it to…

>If all you did was publish an HTML+CSS page, your innocence is self-evident. Anyone can look at your page's source and confirm it. If you link to Google's javascripts though, that should put you into a completely different category of suspicion.

Things change. Back in the day, HTML+CSS page was all it took. These days, wanting to know how people discover your page or how many new readers come to your blog is basics. Reliability and performance tracking is something that wasn't really a commonplace thing back then. For all of those things, you kinda do have to use JS.

The question is, do you necessarily need those features? No. Would it be nice to have? Yes. When I publish a side project, I want to make it nice and great, since I am not getting paid to do it, I am doing it out of pure enthusiasm and motivation for creating the best I can. Forcing anyone in this situation to go through audits and deal with bureaucracy just to be able to publish their personal side-project is a certain way of discouraging people from ever doing so. All you end up with is a bunch of people who are willing to jump through all these hoops because they have something monetary to gain from it or those who know how to jump around those hoops really well.

Re: EU privacy agency urges more safeguards to curb U.S. tech giants

#140

Post by caddywompus »

maedla wrote: post #138
Nasrudith wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is like saying if we make the punishment for any crime tortorous enough we won't need law enforcement. That only answers "what the punishment will theoretically be" not "How can it be found out when it is being broken? By whom? Will we able to take action against it?".

Oh heaven help us if a trillion dollar enterprise gets a fine !!!!

I think what they mean is, how can you track which companies are not complicit, how do you organize the proof so that you can levy the fine successfully
Post reply on HN