581–590 of 614 posts
This kind of ridiculous laws do not understand the boundless nature of internet. If you want to protect privacy of netizens simply make a universal law instead of having different laws in different countries.
Since the Internet is not a fiefdom, universal law is moot. Nation states will draft tracking laws that are only only enforceable through tracking in an attempt to gain their slice of authoritarian pie. Pointing to the Google or US is typical strawman BS and gives people a false sense of security because they should assume everyone, not just the Google, is tracking them. Getting people to own their data is an uphill…
This kind of ridiculous laws do not understand the boundless nature of internet. If you want to protect privacy of netizens simply make a universal law instead of having different laws in different countries.
Other countries may not want to protect privacy at all. Italians are making rules to protect Italians.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I have officials in the EU on the record that IP addresses are deemed personal information and if your business uses AWS and unintentionally passed IP addresses over to any resource in the US, you are technically in violation. Of course, everybody knows that. You have to have good reasons to store people’s IP addresses (ie security logs, which must be disconnected from the tracking/telemetry system). > Will you be…
> Of course, everybody knows that Lol. Thank you for agreeing. You're completely wrong about the fines part, it is discretionary. ie, if tomorrow, there is a negative press cycle, you will certainly be hit with any punishment of their choosing. The incremental warning and fines approach has no practical or legal basis. If it does, get it in writing from __ANY__ entity entrusted with enforcing the GDPR, you will be la…
Not any punishment of their choosing, but according to Art. 83, that defines the maximum fine and the criteria to determine it.
This is not different from what the FDA or the SEC do in the USA. Or do you think they define exact fines for all possible misbehaviours up to the second decimal point regardless of mitigating factors or negligence?
> The incremental warning and fines approach has no practical or legal basis.
The legal basis is GDPR, which is a regulation of the EU. Do you mean that it goes against some EU treaties or rulings of the CJEU? Or the problem is that this notion upsets you somehow and you are telling me because you think I should do something about it?
> If it does, get it in writing from __ANY__ entity entrusted with enforcing the GDPR, you will be laughed out of the room. Europe is a clown show. Ambiguity rules.
I don’t understand what I should get in writing. Art. 83 of GDPR?
> Oh really? Read my comment again. These assholes in the executive are directly changing the letter of the law. ie LEGISLATING.
The Commission has the right of initiative, that is they propose laws that are approved by the Parliament. I’m not sure I understand what is upsetting you here.
Who are “these assholes in the executive” you are referring to? Are they the Commission or CNIL or both or none? I don’t live in France, but I’m sure the CNIL is not making new laws. If it worries you, I can ask around.
> We have laws for a fucking reason. Not to print them out and hang them on the walls like ornaments but so there is discipline in the exercise of power entrusted in people with the power of Government. We can't have personal vendettas run through governmental office.
Which is why the Council of State blocked the CNIL and also why you should not get so upset.
> Fancy. Should i be impressed? Does that disqualify all the abuse of power in your eyes?
I won’t indulge you further on this.
To sum it up, you don’t seem aware of how the EU makes laws but yet you know enough to be very agitated. You are especially upset with French bureaucrats, because some of them made some mistake and other French bureaucrats corrected them. For avoidance of doubt we’ll certify that you are very upset with both groups and that you think something should be done about it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Could you expand on the definition of "doing business with" an entity that you're using here? It seems quite non-standard. If you open the door to a govt office, are you doing business with the company who installed the doors? If you use the toilet, are you doing business with the company that janitorial services are contracted out to?
No, when you leave that govt office you don't have any link to those companies. When you visit a site with Google Analytics, they still have your data after you leave.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Of course, everybody knows that Lol. Thank you for agreeing. You're completely wrong about the fines part, it is discretionary. ie, if tomorrow, there is a negative press cycle, you will certainly be hit with any punishment of their choosing. The incremental warning and fines approach has no practical or legal basis. If it does, get it in writing from __ANY__ entity entrusted with enforcing the GDPR, you will be la…
> Lol. Thank you for agreeing. You're completely wrong about the fines part, it is discretionary. ie, if tomorrow, there is a negative press cycle, you will certainly be hit with any punishment of their choosing. Not any punishment of their choosing, but according to Art. 83, that defines the maximum fine and the criteria to determine it. This is not different from what the FDA or the SEC do in the USA. Or do you thi…
We’ve established that there is presently different outcomes for the same actions under European law. Ie, if you send IP addresses today to AWS, you could be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight subject to 4% of global revenue or 20 million euro fines.
This isn’t about cents or decimals, jackass. You know very well this is about coverage.
Under the FDA or any US agency, you have an option to appeal to an independent branch of government whose decisions are binding. Here, we see the opposite take place in France. Lawlessness. Monarchy. Being run through the bureaucracy. You can’t even bring yourself to admit that the CNIL arrogantly brushed off effectively the SUPREME COURT OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE. You say it’s a “mistake”?? Are you fucking kidding me? Deliberately doing to opposite of what your oversight agency rules is abuse of power.
Can a European citizen simply ever say “yeah, fuck the GDPR, I know that’s a law, but I won’t follow it, doesn’t apply to me?” Of course not. So what gives the CNIL the power to ignore their responsibilities under French and European law?
Even after being blocked by the Council of state, they chose to target an individual company with the exact thing that they were instructed is legal and they should not be interfering with. Respect laws only when you like them?
Clear abuse of power, horrible precedent for democracies and rule of law everywhere and most European assholes connected to politics i speak to behave the way you do, try to brush it under the carpet? Anyone with half a brain will be aghast at what is happening is the EU and if you clowns think discourse that defends assholery from the bureaucracy wins you any favors or makes Europeans lives any better, you more stupid than I’m giving you credit for here.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Lol. Thank you for agreeing. You're completely wrong about the fines part, it is discretionary. ie, if tomorrow, there is a negative press cycle, you will certainly be hit with any punishment of their choosing. Not any punishment of their choosing, but according to Art. 83, that defines the maximum fine and the criteria to determine it. This is not different from what the FDA or the SEC do in the USA. Or do you thi…
If you’re illiterate or deliberately avoiding the issues I’ve highlighted, then all the best to you and your kind. We’ve established that there is presently different outcomes for the same actions under European law. Ie, if you send IP addresses today to AWS, you could be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight subject to 4% of global revenue or 20 million euro fines. This isn’t about cents or decimals, jackas…
If you are breaking the law, if a regulator finds out, you may be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight. Yes, that’s how everything works everywhere. What is worrying you now? The sound of a GDPR breach in a forest where nobody can hear it?
> Under the FDA or any US agency, you have an option to appeal to an independent branch of government whose decisions are binding.
Of course you can file an appeal, just use Google, you’ll find plenty, some successful and some not.
> Here, we see the opposite take place in France. Lawlessness. Monarchy. Being run through the bureaucracy. You can’t even bring yourself to admit that the CNIL arrogantly brushed off effectively the SUPREME COURT OF ADMINISTRATIVE JUSTICE. You say it’s a “mistake”?? Are you fucking kidding me? Deliberately doing to opposite of what your oversight agency rules is abuse of power.
You are getting fixated on a very minor case of French administrative law, that you didn’t even care to understand. The ICO made a minor mistake in considering all cookie walls illegal. The Council of State said that they can’t make a blanket ban, but that they should evaluate all cookie walls individually. No fine has been annulled and the ICO can still deem your cookie wall illegal. So still no monarchy for you.
> Anyone with half a brain will be aghast at what is happening is the EU
Anyone with a half brain will at least spend some time understanding the issue at hand before getting excessively agitated.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
if anyone is curious about why that gives the govt. access: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CLOUD_Act (God willing they repeal it, even if only for the international commerce implications...)
something I'm not getting here. If you buy a EU engineered IoT home appliance that has PII including, whether a user is presently inside their home, then every company I know operating in this market uses US based clouds (what other options are there LOL) to do things like digital twin or device shadows but by using a local availability zone. So this is very different than GA, but depending on the threat-model can be…
Alibaba has a sizeable cloud offering and has for years.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you’re illiterate or deliberately avoiding the issues I’ve highlighted, then all the best to you and your kind. We’ve established that there is presently different outcomes for the same actions under European law. Ie, if you send IP addresses today to AWS, you could be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight subject to 4% of global revenue or 20 million euro fines. This isn’t about cents or decimals, jackas…
> Ie, if you send IP addresses today to AWS, you could be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight subject to 4% of global revenue or 20 million euro fines. If you are breaking the law, if a regulator finds out, you may be deemed to be doing something illegal overnight. Yes, that’s how everything works everywhere. What is worrying you now? The sound of a GDPR breach in a forest where nobody can hear it? > Under…
By admitting data flows to us resources are illegal, you’ve just said that what you’re doing right now can be construed as illegal activity on the part of the website you’re on. HN is indeed hosted on us resources. You touch Microsoft excel and guess what? Us resources get your personal data.
So you’ve just basically admitted that under GDPR, all regular internet activity is illegal if it touches a US server. Hence “coverage”. Hence, everyone living under really, the discretion of the monarchs.
Thanks for playing. Dumbass.