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

American Data Privacy and Protection Act

congress.gov

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 313 posts

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#121

Post by randomdata »

chitowneats wrote: post #80
yumraj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, we have the usual anti-privacy companies there as well as ByteDance .. what can go wrong.

It's insane enough letting Big Corps lobby your legislature and even write language that eventually gets enshrined as law. It's even more insane we allow the state-affiliated entities of our adversaries to do this.

> It's insane enough letting Big Corps lobby your legislature

Well, it would be rather pointless to elect to hire a representative to represent you and then not take time to make your position known with them. They certainly are not mind readers.

And you can't realistically remove big businesses from citizenry as those who are stakeholders in big business are going to bias their position to what benefits their business. Business is people, after all. ByteDance certainly has stakeholders who are American citizens.

So we make a best effort to register those biases for the sake of transparency. The only real alternative, short of abandoning democracy entirely, is to leave it a mystery who talked to their representatives.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#122

Post by elashri »

chitowneats wrote: post #80
yumraj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, we have the usual anti-privacy companies there as well as ByteDance .. what can go wrong.

It's insane enough letting Big Corps lobby your legislature and even write language that eventually gets enshrined as law. It's even more insane we allow the state-affiliated entities of our adversaries to do this.

What is more insane is that this is not considered corruption. Usually if this happens outside US, the US government itself will call that corruption.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#123

Post by pessimizer »

bdougherty wrote: post #103
matai_kolila wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember the last time I saw a non-iroinic reference to 1984. Have you read the book? It's nothing at all like how we live today, and (as far as I can tell) this would do nothing towards making our lives more like how the lives of Winston and Julia were in the novel.

Telescreen, newspeak, mass surveillance, perpetual war, "officials" acting as if what they are saying now is always what they said, etc. It's almost easier to list the things that we don't have in common.

Speakwrites are coming. It'll be no time at all until your computer changes what you're typing to something more appropriate, or throws up a modal that reads:

"Most writers don't write things like this. You should consider for a moment whether this is how you want to present yourself to others. Press [suggestions] for alternate ways to express a similar idea, or press [submit] to become legally and socially liable for the consequences of your actions."

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#124

Post by 2OEH8eoCRo0 »

chitowneats wrote: post #80
yumraj wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Great, we have the usual anti-privacy companies there as well as ByteDance .. what can go wrong.

It's insane enough letting Big Corps lobby your legislature and even write language that eventually gets enshrined as law. It's even more insane we allow the state-affiliated entities of our adversaries to do this.

Freedom of speech. All they do is pay people to speak for them. They have money to do that. Gifts and other tomfoolery is obviously no good but I'm not sure how you could gate this without running afoul of the first amendment.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#125

Post by [deleted] »

bdougherty wrote: post #103
matai_kolila wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember the last time I saw a non-iroinic reference to 1984. Have you read the book? It's nothing at all like how we live today, and (as far as I can tell) this would do nothing towards making our lives more like how the lives of Winston and Julia were in the novel.

Telescreen, newspeak, mass surveillance, perpetual war, "officials" acting as if what they are saying now is always what they said, etc. It's almost easier to list the things that we don't have in common.

[deleted]

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#126

Post by matai_kolila »

bdougherty wrote: post #103
matai_kolila wrote: post #43

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't remember the last time I saw a non-iroinic reference to 1984. Have you read the book? It's nothing at all like how we live today, and (as far as I can tell) this would do nothing towards making our lives more like how the lives of Winston and Julia were in the novel.

Telescreen, newspeak, mass surveillance, perpetual war, "officials" acting as if what they are saying now is always what they said, etc. It's almost easier to list the things that we don't have in common.

Literally none of those things are real as actually described in the novel.

Keeping a diary is punishable by death (that's the premise of the entire story), it's kind of silly to compare that with our lives today.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#127

Post by m463 »

shadowgovt wrote: post #51
shishy wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Was scanning for this thanks for pointing it out. Some of these banners are infuriating, and if I use firefox containers sometimes I see them over and over, especially if I'm clearing my cookies. It is insane to me that this isn't already a standard.

Standardization was attempted. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track the tl;dr for that story is that it wasn't mandated to be honored, the industry didn't voluntarily adopt it widely, and when IE 10 tried to turn it on by default and the standard's lead supporter responded by submitting a patch to Apache web server to ignore the DNT signal coming from IE 10 because "does not protect anyone's privacy unless the…

I believe DNT was used for better browser fingerprinting.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#128

Post by legitster »

makeitdouble wrote: post #113
legitster wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a large difference though between what governments could presumably buy from ad trackers or data warehouses and what they can get by intercepting unencrypted web traffic at the ISP level.

Wouldn't it be the same if the ISP sold the gov. the extracted info they want ? In this setting the gov can hint at what data it wants, and private parties will manage to get it for resale.

I think to OP's point, if we are worried about government wrongdoing we should pass laws against government wrongdoing. It really doesn't matter what the private industry does or doesn't do if the government still has the right to take it.

I am not afraid of my data being used against me to sell products. I am afraid of the government abusing their monopoly on violence. The first seems like misdirection.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#130

Post by thayne »

drstewart wrote: post #12
prego_xo wrote: post #7

> (B) any time beyond the initial 2 times described in subparagraph (A), may allow the individual to exercise such right for a reasonable fee for each request. Paying any sum of money to receive a copy of or request to delete my private data is unreasonable in nature.

This is normal: https://www.techrepublic.com/article/how-to-request-your-per... >Although, the ICO also notes that a firm may charge a “reasonable fee” when “a request is manifestly unfounded or excessive, particularly if it is repetitive.” Privacy request shouldn't enable mechanisms of denial of service type attacks against companies.

So you could have something like each person is allowed two free data requests per year, after that you can charge for it, or something like that.
Post reply on HN