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

UK to depart from GDPR

lawgazette.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

341–350 of 659 posts

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#341

Post by hnlmorg »

Nursie wrote: post #330
hnlmorg wrote: post #325

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Good question. There's a few reasons I use that phrase and I agree with you that, from a statistical perspective, it isn't the correct usage of the term: - There was a lot of misinformation spread (on both sides of the debate). So people were voting for issues that didn't apply. - There were a lot of protest votes from people who assumed "Remain" would win and who also did want to remain but wanted to voice disagreem…

I can accept that there were confounding factors which may have affected the result and how enduring a picture of UK attitudes it might be. I wonder if any referendum could be 100% free of those factors? I just object to the use of the phrase - there is no margin for error here, it forms the full picture of how the population voted, not an estimate. People use this phraseology, and I've even seen the term "not statis…

If you acknowledge the results are not a 100% reliable indicator then there is a margin for error. The key difference is whether you look at it in the context of

  "This result is reflective of what the majority _want_"
or

  "This result is reflective of what the majority _voted for_"
The latter isn't always the same as the former in cases where information isn't clear or where the poll options are too vague. Both of which plagued the EU referendum.

I do get your point that "margin for error" is a statistical term and it is not technically being applied correctly here. But the crux of what that term refers to does still apply to the former context above.

As for why the context matters: because every conversion that happened since focused on the former point with MPs even coining the phrase "the will of the people" yet the people's "will" was still unclear.

That all said, I don't think there is any way such a referendum would have worked on a topic as diverse and complex as our relations with the EU.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#342

Post by Normille »

thu2111 wrote: post #296
selfhoster11 wrote: post #250

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's not inevitable, but the current government appears to move in that direction intentionally. - The EU exit was, among other things, accused of being a way to relax regulation and legislation to degrade product standards to a US-like level. Chlorinated chicken was a big item on everyone's discussion agenda a while back. This is now evidently happening. - The government is severely underfunding the NHS, despite pay…

The US is hardly some low regulation capitalist utopia. The US regulatory code is enormous. Plenty of self-proclaimed "Europeans" think it is, but in my experience they often know relatively little about the issues in question and are just parroting cultural talking points they picked up elsewhere. Indeed, you seem to admit that here, when you state that you got your views of what British people believe from your "ne…

  >The NHS is a socialist anachronism
Always makes me laugh when Americans use "socialist" as a derogatory term. A huge number of people in Europe [myself included] are proud to consider themselves "socialists".

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#343

Post by Nursie »

hnlmorg wrote: post #341
Nursie wrote: post #330

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can accept that there were confounding factors which may have affected the result and how enduring a picture of UK attitudes it might be. I wonder if any referendum could be 100% free of those factors? I just object to the use of the phrase - there is no margin for error here, it forms the full picture of how the population voted, not an estimate. People use this phraseology, and I've even seen the term "not statis…

If you acknowledge the results are not a 100% reliable indicator then there is a margin for error. The key difference is whether you look at it in the context of "This result is reflective of what the majority _want_" or "This result is reflective of what the majority _voted for_" The latter isn't always the same as the former in cases where information isn't clear or where the poll options are too vague. Both of whi…

> If you acknowledge the results are not a 100% reliable indicator

But they are a 100% reliable indicator of how people would vote, because they did vote that way. And I'm really not sure it's valid to start second guessing that what people actually wanted is different to that, because you then have to second guess every vote and really, where does thaty leave democracy?

> That all said, I don't think there is any way such a referendum would have worked on a topic as diverse and complex as our relations with the EU.

Very much agreed.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#344

Post by dash2 »

gmac wrote: post #270
dash2 wrote: post #258

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> OK, so the problem is that I find it basically impossible to understand how a well-informed and rational person could come to the conclusions you've come to. That is indeed a problem, but it is your problem. If 48% of people support anything , there must be some reasons for it. You're right about the consensus among economists. At the same time, 10 years ago there was a consensus about the virtues of free trade. Th…

> That is indeed a problem, but it is your problem. If 48% of people support anything, there must be some reasons for it. Sure, and I think the most palatable conclusion is that a very large number of people are not well informed. If you look at UK news outlets — what they choose to report, how they choose to report it, and the interests of the people who own them — this doesn't stretch credibility very much. > Also,…

>> Also, economics isn't immune to bias. Are papers showing a link from immigration to low wages, or crime, or reduced trust, likely to get a fair hearing?

>Yes, I believe they are. I am wary here of Michael Gove's quasi-fascist rhetoric of having "had enough of experts".

Heh.... I'm an economist. Trust me on this one.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#345

Post by Mauricebranagh »

dash2 wrote: post #234
Mauricebranagh wrote: post #214

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Oh and second amendment style gun rights too

I find it very hard to believe that that would be a popular policy in the UK. Got evidence?

Farage mentioned it and decent proportion of Brexiteers would go for it.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#346

Post by Mauricebranagh »

sofixa wrote: post #329
dash2 wrote: post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find it very hard to believe that that would be a popular policy in the UK. Got evidence?

Yeah, even policemen rarely have guns in the UK, allowing everyone to have one would be lunacy.

You know we can own shotguns and full power rifles (303) in the UK.

Thankfully the armed police have very stringent training in the Uk.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#347

Post by imtringued »

dash2 wrote: post #258
gmac wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

OK, so the problem is that I find it basically impossible to understand how a well-informed and rational person could come to the conclusions you've come to. The EU isn't perfect, but you'll struggle to argue that it hasn't expanded peace, prosperity and human rights across the continent. This is motherhood-and-apple-pie stuff. Arguments in favour of Brexit thus tend to boil down to immigration and 'sovereignty'. The…

> OK, so the problem is that I find it basically impossible to understand how a well-informed and rational person could come to the conclusions you've come to. That is indeed a problem, but it is your problem. If 48% of people support anything , there must be some reasons for it. You're right about the consensus among economists. At the same time, 10 years ago there was a consensus about the virtues of free trade. Th…

>You're right about the consensus among economists. At the same time, 10 years ago there was a consensus about the virtues of free trade. Then Autor et al. wrote "The China Shock" and other similar papers, and, well, now there's not a consensus any more. Also, economics isn't immune to bias. Are papers showing a link from immigration to low wages, or crime, or reduced trust, likely to get a fair hearing?

Physical reality: Factories are in China we don't have to work in the EU to get manufactured stuff! The Chinese are working their butts off for us and we are making them rich in the process!

Anti free trade idea: Chinese people working their butts off for us should be illegal. We would rather work ourselves and prefer expensive domestically produced products (if you did, why make the "inferior" competition illegal?). We don't need high skill jobs, low skill work is just as important!

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#348

Post by orwin »

avian wrote: post #191
brmgb wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be honest, there is little emotional investment in Europe regarding Brexit. People wanted to be done with it as the process was wasting valuable union time and there was a feeling it was needlessly draging on but from what I have seen Europeans actually care very little about the UK. Brexit mostly was and remains a domestic issue which is why it's such a touchy subject on HN where there is probably a significant n…

> there is little emotional investment in Europe regarding Brexit As someone from the continental Europe, this is not at all my experience, but I'm sure this depends on the specific social bubble I'm in. There are plenty of people around that had their lives complicated because of it, enough that most people I know have very strong feelings about it.

In my rural/coastal bubble, people seems to believe than UK homeowners will suddenly have to sell their properties and that prices will drop, and are pretty much happy about brexit. I know it won't happen, but hey, at least its cheap joy and hope.

But mostly, no one cares.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#349

Post by arethuza »

Normille wrote: post #342
thu2111 wrote: post #296

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The US is hardly some low regulation capitalist utopia. The US regulatory code is enormous. Plenty of self-proclaimed "Europeans" think it is, but in my experience they often know relatively little about the issues in question and are just parroting cultural talking points they picked up elsewhere. Indeed, you seem to admit that here, when you state that you got your views of what British people believe from your "ne…

>The NHS is a socialist anachronism Always makes me laugh when Americans use "socialist" as a derogatory term. A huge number of people in Europe [myself included] are proud to consider themselves "socialists".

To be fair the founder of the NHS did see it as a socialist:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aneurin_Bevan

"Illness is neither an indulgence for which people have to pay, nor an offence for which they should be penalised, but a misfortune the cost of which should be shared by the community."

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#350

Post by imtringued »

klingon78 wrote: post #297
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #252

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's actually fairly easy to be GDPR compliant almost by default, TBQH. It either takes a lot of effort or a lot of laziness to somehow end up non-compliant.

Removing or anonymizing PII in a large system not already designed for PII removal or one you don’t have resources to manage can be painful. Companies of all sizes can have a lot of PII and code that’s not GDPR compliant, and it’s non-trivial to fix that. When asked by a user to remove PII, the removal is sometimes incomplete at these companies. Even the process of incompletely the removing PII wastes time; the users…

I understand the economic downsides of GDPR. If you abolished it with the intention of gaining international competitiveness I would consider it an acceptable trade. I'm still split on whether GDPR really accomplished all that much.
Post reply on HN