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

Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 215 posts

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#61

Post by TrackerFF »

The current SCOTUS steamrolling isn't just about abortion, it's part of a long fought right-wing battle to give more power to the states, and less to the federal government.

And with that said, I think people must simply prepare for some states having absolutely abysmal and regressive laws / protections when it comes to privacy, gender / sex, etc., while the rest will continue to live in the present day.

I'm not a fan of slippery slope arguments, but do you really think people that will fight this hard for essentially making abortion illegal (in certain states) will be content with just that? Or are fundamentally the type of people to only control one aspect of life?

Absolutely not. The SCOTUS is signaling that anything that's not an originalist black-or-white interpretation of the constitution, is going to be fair game at the state level in the future.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#62

Post by kelseyfrog »

hahaitsfunny wrote: post #35
fny wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Neoliberalism is an economic philosophy. It's not tied to "progressivism" or "conservatism". In short, it promotes free-market economics without borders.

Where did I mention progressivism or conservativism? Neoliberalism is intrinsically tied to politics because you can't affect economic policy without getting involved in the political system... Regardless, your implications surrounding my comment, and my intent by making it, are incorrect. Both movements have been disastrous for the United States.

The confusion stems from the introduction of "neoconservatism" into a thread which just before was topic-centered around neoliberalism. To a reader it looks as if it's trying to establish that neoliberalism and neoconservatism belong to the same category and together form a unity of opposing forces. It reads as if neoconservatism is a conservative form of neoliberalism (or vice versa).

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#63

Post by treis »

hef19898 wrote: post #47
mvdwoord wrote: post #25

Plenty of uproar after Roe v Wade overturning, even here in the EU but.. The real shame is leaving lawmaking to the courts due to political opportunism. I am fully in favor of legalized abortion, but why was it never codified in law? Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. So, you reap what you sow if you ask me. I learned that many countries, including my own, made, and make that mistake…

Also Europe based, I see that as big over sight. I am absolutely sure, so, that the republicans will use there judicative power to fullest extent together with a majority in the House should they get said majority. And they will throw out the filibuster in the senate with the blink of an eye if it serves them. The democrats on the other hand are way to tame.

>the republicans will use there judicative power to fullest extent

Sure, but it's still better to make them do it rather than establishing that the Federal government can regulate abortion.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#64

Post by coffeeblack »

mvdwoord wrote: post #25

Plenty of uproar after Roe v Wade overturning, even here in the EU but.. The real shame is leaving lawmaking to the courts due to political opportunism. I am fully in favor of legalized abortion, but why was it never codified in law? Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. So, you reap what you sow if you ask me. I learned that many countries, including my own, made, and make that mistake…

Depends how you define adoration. Until heart beat? Third month? Sixth month? Until right before birth?

I think most were fine with third month.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#65

Post by mvdwoord »

turndown wrote: post #56
mvdwoord wrote: post #25

Plenty of uproar after Roe v Wade overturning, even here in the EU but.. The real shame is leaving lawmaking to the courts due to political opportunism. I am fully in favor of legalized abortion, but why was it never codified in law? Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. So, you reap what you sow if you ask me. I learned that many countries, including my own, made, and make that mistake…

>Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. In the US, a ruling like this(ironic to say right now) is so much more ironclad than a law is in general, if people are going to come after it. Legal challenge after legal challenge slowly boils laws away until you have so many exceptions about portions of a law specifically struck down that the whole thing doesn't even make sense anymore. And of co…

This was overturned no? So is this now also more ironclad? And the whole point of elections and politics and lawmaking is to keep up with changing culture and norms?

I see your point in practicality, but are they mutually exclusive?

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#66

Post by vorpalhex »

core-utility wrote: post #41
itsoktocry wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> but to talk about them in the context of the recent Supreme Court decision is dishonest I disagree, this is an example of why data collection can be scary. Data that was perfectly inane yesterday can be used against people tomorrow. How much data do the powers-that-be have access to that can be used similarly in the future? The dystopian view is that they'll be able to paint any narrative if you fall in their cross…

But that's always been true, data can always be used against you regardless of what the laws are.

You are fully and entirely correct.

Now, really, ponder on that.

Your instagram/Facebook likes alone reveal your gender, sexuality, relationship status and more. Add in a touch of PII to narrow it down to a single person.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#67

Post by Teknoman117 »

core-utility wrote: post #38
defterGoose wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You've got the de facto situation in Texas though. Anyone being allowed to sue you for getting an abortion effectively means that the "state" can come after you. Make no mistake, these laws aim to harm anyone involved. The entire context of this discussion stems from the decision. You're wrong, and frankly, a little churlish.

Texas' situation is specifically worded for the state not to come after you. It's a citizen's matter. "this statute does not limit who can bring suit, so long as it is a private citizen" Additionally, in the Texas case you can't sue the mother, only those who aid in performing the abortion.

It's hard to say the state isn't coming after you in this case though.

Why the hell does my neighbor get to care if a specific doctor performed an abortion? Why can they launch a civil case against and be compensated financially for something that doesn't affect them in any way?

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#68

Post by MonkeyMalarky »

mvdwoord wrote: post #25

Plenty of uproar after Roe v Wade overturning, even here in the EU but.. The real shame is leaving lawmaking to the courts due to political opportunism. I am fully in favor of legalized abortion, but why was it never codified in law? Not a priority according to democratic politicians. Not a priority. So, you reap what you sow if you ask me. I learned that many countries, including my own, made, and make that mistake…

The thing where politicians hold any sort of progressive legislation hostage with extortionate demands over unrelated issues is a common theme across countries.

Like government funded Catholic schools in Canada. Something that shouldn't exist anymore but whoops it's in the constitution so it's going to be there forever now because no one would ever agree to just one change.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#69

Post by maxerickson »

cato_the_elder wrote: post #60
maxerickson wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no such thing as an abortion clinic, there are facilities that provide a range of healthcare services, potentially including abortions.

> a range of healthcare services Come on man, that's just muddying the water. The courts do care about intent, and Google's intent is clear in this case. Also, that's like saying there is no such thing as a gun shop, just a retail business providing access to various kinds of gear.

Their intent is pretty clearly to protect the privacy of women seeking healthcare at facilities that do provide abortions. But they are not peeking at what sort of healthcare the women are seeking. There's a clear distinction.

"Without regard to the purpose of their visit" is going to pass muster pretty much anywhere.

Re: Roe's overturn is tech's privacy apocalypse

#70

Post by zaptheimpaler »

bearjaws wrote: post #2

"Tech industry tries to make up for regressive politics" Hate to say it, but there may not be a technical solution to the failings of the USA.

Yeah its getting tiring watching the increasingly convoluted mental gymnastics to make companies and individuals responsible for completely failed lawmaking and rabid dog enforcement agencies.

Literally in the article:

“Be smart: Congress won't save us, or these companies, from this battle.

…

But long efforts by legislators to pass a national privacy law — an effort many companies support — remain stalemated this summer, as they have been for years.”

No, your fucking government is unable or unwilling to act in the interests of its people. What is a government that is unaccountable to its citizens (whether due to gridlock or malice) called?

National privacy laws would apply to all companies, present and future and to all cases of overreach. Instead, we are all supposed to fight the current big tech cos and fiddle with Google settings to delete location data and buy pinephones and gmail alternatives and drop facebook and use Signal and don’t buy a smart TV and don’t use Github and on and on? Maybe we need to invest more energy into fixing a dead government instead of tech.

Post reply on HN