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

81–90 of 215 posts

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

#81

Post by halostatue »

MonkeyMalarky wrote: post #68
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.

It can be changed. Quebec used to have to fund Protestant (probably Anglican) schools. At some point in the last few decades, their part of the Constitution was updated so that they have to fund English-language schools. Ontario currently doesn’t have the political will to change this, but it isn’t entirely immutable. (Interestingly, there are a few Protestant schools funded in some places in Ontario, where the majority of the population were French Catholic.)

Quebec is in the process of making it difficult for anyone to attend English-language schools, but I see Quebec bills 21 and 96 potentially causing major pushback against the notwithstanding clause (hopefully it will kill the damned thing) and causing another round of people and companies to leave Quebec as they did because of René Lévesque and the PQ.

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

#82

Post by cato_the_elder »

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…

> why was it never codified in law

Because a large part of the country is against late-stage abortions, and there is a need to keep a semblance of democracy?

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

#83

Post by cato_the_elder »

maxerickson wrote: post #77
cato_the_elder wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Their intent is pretty clearly to protect the privacy of women seeking healthcare at facilities that do provide abortions And they just happen to think of that after the recent supreme court ruling?

That doesn't matter!

IANAL, so I don't know about that, but one would hope that the judiciary isn't too dumb.

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

#84

Post by ck2 »

Tip of iceberg. Everyone knows they are going after marriage equality next.

Imagine having to end partner medical, etc. benefits for millions of people previously legally married across the country.

And why would they stop there?

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

#85

Post by matthewdgreen »

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 US's constitutional system doesn't work well in a polarized environment. There are too many veto points, two conflicting branches that can each claim to be "legitimately elected", and even the elected branches don't represent the popular will due to compromises made in the pre-modern era.

We've papered over the effects of this paralysis by delegating power to the executive agencies and the Courts, but this era is now coming to an end. Some folks believe that as we remove those options our legislative system will be "forced" to work properly. But there's no evidence to support this: most Presidential democracies have collapsed into autocracy, and our own system has previously collapsed into secession and civil war.

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

#86

Post by maxerickson »

cato_the_elder wrote: post #83
maxerickson wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That doesn't matter!

IANAL, so I don't know about that, but one would hope that the judiciary isn't too dumb.

The fact that people are willing to conflate visits to those facilities with seeking abortion is itself a clear justification to discard all data about visits to those facilities!

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

#87

Post by defterGoose »

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.

My suspicion is that anyone can be considered a "private citizen" in a certain context. Trump certainly thought he could throw away his notes while in office. What do you want to bet that TX judges will recognize some county-registrar-who discovers-an-abortion's right to bring suit as an individual? At least when the state itself is officially bringing suit, there are a limited number of individuals who can decide to sue you. In reality, what will happen is that if the TX supreme court disallows an to state employee from participating in the suit, there will be a network of state employees who are able to inform others who are able to sue.

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

#88

Post by odessacubbage »

jdcarr wrote: post #49
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…

I think there’s more preventing the passage of a law protecting an individuals right to abortion than whether it was a matter of political priority. To pass such a law would require 60 votes in the senate AIUI. Given that this has been a massive part of the republican platform there’s no way ten senators would flip in the current senate. It could have been passed in the Obama years but I wonder if the public would ha…

the legislature as an institution is not really designed or intended to pass 'offensive' bills, it is supposed to reflect the consensus of the states which should hopefully reflect the will of the public at least to some degree. it should also be considered the same gridlock barring federal abortion rights also prevents a federal abortion ban so those who blame all political failures on the filibuster should really keep that in mind. if the people of tennessee, mississippi arkansas etc decide that legal abortion is a defining issue then their representatives would in kind be expected to reflect those values on the floor. while that precludes short-term solutions (once again, as intended) i do not believe that it is a political impossibility as is so often claimed. however, for the first time in a long while, democrats will be required to actually 'do politics'

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

#89

Post by cwp »

titzer wrote: post #51
johndhi wrote: post #18

Everybody acts like tech companies get tremendous value from analyzing PII. Almost all of tech (perhaps excluding fb) mostly just collects pii because it's easier to do so than not, and because everybody else is. If it were banned in a clear sensible way worldwide I don't think the tech would suffer much.

The revenue difference I have heard, ballpark, for targeted advertising (based on tracking) on the web, en masse is 2x. So the gajillion dollar online ad industry would only be set back by 4 or 5 years. So, 2018? Not bad. I say, do it. Ban targeted advertising on the web.

It's not the ad industry that would suffer, but small businesses that buy ads. Targeted advertising is how new products and services can bootstrap themselves into existence. As scale increases, targeting accuracy declines, so larger companies don't benefit as much. But if you want to put your product in front of 1000 people who will be highly likely to try it, targeted advertising is superb. If that goes away, it's the startup ecosystem that will be hardest hit.

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

#90

Post by haswell »

A4ET8a8uTh0 wrote: post #7

Eh, this is the one thing I hoped would push non-tech people like my wife into a more active stance. I showed her one of the related articles discussing apps tracking menstrual cycles and poor HIPAA protections in today's world, but the result was sadly the opposite to what I hoped for. In that particular case, addiction to her favorite games clearly outweighed espoused concern of Roe vs Wade impact. It is odd. I was…

> addiction to her favorite games clearly outweighed espoused concern of Roe vs Wade impact

I’m curious, how are the two related?

Post reply on HN