EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants • Hacker News Board

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#221

Post by 8fingerlouie » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:11 PM UTC

andyferris wrote: post #172

8fingerlouie wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That lowest common denominator will be probably being able to send text messages. Maybe a little more. It was my understanding that we already have a (fairly old) standard that does just that, which also currently works as a lowest common denominator for texting between at least android and iOS.

There’s a telecom protocol tied to your carrier and phone number that predates both android and iOS, but not a (free to use, free to implement) internet protocol. (EDIT: unless you are talking about email)

Whatever communication method you select, there will always be ties to a carrier.

In GSM it’s a IMEI ID / phone number, in TCP/IP it’s a MAC/IP address. Internet also requires a subscription, subscriber and more.

And how would you implement a messaging service with “anonymous” endpoints ? Can’t send messages without a unique identifier for the recipient.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#222

Post by toyg » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:13 PM UTC

can16358p wrote: post #194

Vespasian wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I (and apparently the EU law makers) think they should be. When elected officials decide that a Plattform/network is now part of the public space the owners loose out. It happened to railways, telephone grids and all in all was an improvement.

If government thinks access to a commonground chat platform is a necessity for the public, then they should either provide it themselves or buy/outsource a state-operated private service instead of messing up with private companies' private platforms. What they are doing is equivalent of trespassing private property, such laws shouldn't exist in 2022.

> a state-operated private service

If they implement a public service, freemarketers not unlike yourself will accuse them of unfair competition and spend their lives sabotaging them, like Murdoch does with the BBC in the UK.

The reality is that your position is effectively that nothing should change, and everything in this space is as good as it can be. The public at large clearly disagrees, and this is a step in the direction of addressing some problems that are extremely hard to deny.

Besides, nationalisation would be nothing new. There are laws in your country, whichever it may be, for the state to confiscate your land for the public interest. That's not trespassing, that's the power of the collective trumping other rights. This is not it anyway - this is mandating standards, like the size of your electrical plugs.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#223

Post by NotOscarWilde » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:14 PM UTC

rolisz wrote: post #87

8fingerlouie wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's perfectly fine to support some baseline feature set (one-to-one text messages) and build more optional features on top of it. So keep the status quo (SMS/MMS) and build more features on top of that ?

In the EU (at least in Romania), MMS is not a thing, and even SMS is not the status quo. Everyone talks using WhatsApp mostly.

SMS stopped to be status quo here (central Europe) because it still costs money to send each single text. It made sense when no other mobile communication option was available (early 2000s) but not anymore. WhatsApp or any other messaging platform is strictly better as long as your phone is connected to the internet.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#224

Post by cryptica » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:15 PM UTC

IMO, based on their current business models, big US tech companies would be better off financially by pulling out of the EU entirely than by allowing interoperability via public APIs.

They will lose most of their users to small platforms if they provide too much interoperability - Not just in the EU but all over the world. Their monopoly over the bulk of the world's user accounts is their only real competitive advantage.

That said, in terms of social good, open APIs would be great.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#225

Post by toyg » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:19 PM UTC

cryptica wrote: post #224

IMO, based on their current business models, big US tech companies would be better off financially by pulling out of the EU entirely than by allowing interoperability via public APIs. They will lose most of their users to small platforms if they provide too much interoperability - Not just in the EU but all over the world. Their monopoly over the bulk of the world's user accounts is their only real competitive advant…

They can (and likely will) produce a layer of bureaucracy that could keep out any non-EU player if they wish, stuff like having to register with them with EU-based company information before they give you an API key (this is just an example).

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#226

Post by varajelle » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:22 PM UTC

8fingerlouie wrote: post #17

hrnnnnnn wrote: post #2

> Parliament also succeeded in convincing the Council of interoperability requirements for messaging services, meaning outfits such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger or iMessage will have to open up and interoperate with smaller messaging platforms. For group chats, this requirement will be rolled out over a period of four years. This would be great. I remember using pidgin back in the day and it was really convenient…

> meaning outfits such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger or iMessage will have to open up and interoperate with smaller messaging platforms The way i read it, they're calling for open standards, which can be a good thing. Sadly, open standards also slow down the development of new features, as everybody needs to be "on board" for new features to roll out. Take email (SMTP, IMAP, etc) as an example, where no major progr…

But email evolved. You can now use a 8bit encoding, use formating with html content. Is encrypted with TLS. Send calendar events. PGP did take of for people who care. You can even revoke emails.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#227

Post by matthewmacleod » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:26 PM UTC

emptysongglass wrote: post #208

matthewmacleod wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, I am declaring these things as facts based on my own experience with European startups – yours may vary. So far, the approach has been miles away from "spending huge capital" or "neurotically worrying", and much more "just following the regulations and getting on with it". I also have experience from two start-up scale-ups that many clients are saying we won't work with you if you use a US Big Cloud Yeah, I've n…

I'm confused: your Hacker News blurb says you're the head of a UK based company. Where are you getting your direct experience from? This is going to sound more aggressive than it is but it doesn't look like you're qualified to be declaring these kinds of facts on the realities faced by EU businesses. I'm still working at one of the two companies I mentioned, in Denmark. It's a very real problem for us right now. And…

Where are you getting your direct experience from? This is going to sound more aggressive than it is but it doesn't look like you're qualified to be declaring these kinds of facts on the realities faced by EU businesses.

I would suggest you focus on talking about the specific issues you face rather than questioning my background, but bear in mind that the UK was part of the GDPR pre-Brexit, is presently subject to much the same regime, our company is a recipient of Horizon 2020 funding, we have offices, customers and investors in the EU, and I have spent several years now dealing with the regulatory issues raised by GDPR and how they impact on our business. I am reasonably confident that I know what I'm talking about – you experience may vary, and I am way more interested in hearing what you feel your challenges are than I am in nitpicking your credentials.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#228

Post by FartyMcFarter » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:27 PM UTC

robertlagrant wrote: post #113

FartyMcFarter wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's no need for decryption. If you want to send things to Facebook Messenger, you can just send it to that service directly.

The topic is e2ee.

I think the topic was interoperability, i.e. being able to send messages between apps regardless of encryption considerations.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#229

Post by shafyy » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:27 PM UTC

8fingerlouie wrote: post #17

hrnnnnnn wrote: post #2

> Parliament also succeeded in convincing the Council of interoperability requirements for messaging services, meaning outfits such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger or iMessage will have to open up and interoperate with smaller messaging platforms. For group chats, this requirement will be rolled out over a period of four years. This would be great. I remember using pidgin back in the day and it was really convenient…

> meaning outfits such as WhatsApp, Facebook Messenger or iMessage will have to open up and interoperate with smaller messaging platforms The way i read it, they're calling for open standards, which can be a good thing. Sadly, open standards also slow down the development of new features, as everybody needs to be "on board" for new features to roll out. Take email (SMTP, IMAP, etc) as an example, where no major progr…

> Sadly, open standards also slow down the development of new features, as everybody needs to be "on board" for new features to roll out.

Stop repeating this talking point of big tech. This is FUD. Sure, developing the standard further requires more work and is slower if just one person alone developed it, but the upsides clearly overweigh.

Furthemore, everonye is free to build their own features in their own app that are not part of an open protocol (good examples are snooze or send later features in email).

PS: As a sister comment pointed out, open standard is not even in the scope of this new EU act. It's only about opening up their APIs. They are not foced to use an open protocol.

Re: EU negotiators agree new rules to rein in tech giants

#230

Post by oxplot » Fri, Mar 25, 2022, 2:27 PM UTC

hda111 wrote: post #219

I‘m not sure if this is a good thing. Despite email being an open standard we have now the situation that most emails are processed by either Google or Microsoft. When the same happens to Matrix we will have a situation where it’s so hard to make your own home server that nobody wants to do it anymore.

> processed by either Google or Microsoft

Let's first clear up why this is: spam control. Google along with the rest of the industry has essentially killed email spam through the many additions to classical email standards. From reputation based delivery, to spam databases, crypto signatures and more. This isn't just to reduce an eye sore in your inbox. Spam does real damage, financial and otherwise.

Despite the complexity needed to run a reliable email system, it's still possible to do and many do. It also allows for innovation without a lot of capital (e.g. licensing fees paid to walled garden owners). Without open interoperability, it's either impossible (e.g. general iMessage), limiting (e.g. iMessage, WhatsApp for business) or expensive to do.