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

211–220 of 313 posts

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#211

Post by pessimizer »

matai_kolila wrote: post #207
rt4mn wrote: post #199

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> specifically speaking 1984 is not a reflection of current reality for Americans, and you seem to agree with that Of course 1984 is not a reflection of current reality. it was not a reflection of current reality back when it was written. Science fiction is not a fun-house mirror reflecting back a warped version of the present, its a kaleidoscope looking into the future. I have not seen anyone in this thread say "198…

> 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. > The thing I tell most people is that we currently live under more surveillance then folks in 1984. > In ~20 years you'll see how silly you are for welcoming totalitarianism. You won't care until it effects you.…

> Three examples from this thread (one by you) of folks claiming "1984 is totally real and not a work of fiction",

I'm not sure that you can accuse anyone of misconstruing anything unless you can find this quote in another comment, or anything resembling it.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#212

Post by pessimizer »

say_it_as_it_is wrote: post #164

This is the proverbial shaking of the tree, whereby elected officials will ask (threaten) tech lobbyists for campaign contributions in exchange for their vote against the act

It's also potentially a huge score for some Democratic politicians, because for every Republican that supports the bill, they're going to need a Democrat to defect.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#213

Post by rt4mn »

vinay_ys wrote: post #177
rt4mn wrote: post #162

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Microsoft has been a particularly bad actor in this space. They have been hiring lobbyists to advocate at the state level for shitty "consumer privacy bills", specifically because they want to forestall and kneecap federal legislation. https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2020/03/tech-lobbyists-are-pus...

What's Microsoft's interest in this? They don't have a big search or ads business. What are they doing with Consumer data?

Their interest is in their bottom line and avoiding regulation. Pretty much any company that has a lot of users creating accounts will be impacted by even the most milquetoast privacy regulation to some degree or another, and I guess microsoft sees the cost of hiring a bunch of lobyists as cheaper then having to deal with the regulation that might come about if they dont.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#214

Post by prego_xo »

legitster wrote: post #205
prego_xo wrote: post #183

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Very fair point, and I understand the necessity of data collection in some cases. I do feel like that's a cost that's incurred voluntarily, though, and shouldn't fall on the shoulders of users/customers. Some people might not want data to be collected to begin with, so the cost ends up being your company's fault and not theirs.

But we have to process every request even if we do not find any of their data . A majority of requests are actually this way - people use online services that submit blanket removal requests.

Yeah, that's definitely the case and I see where the hassle is, but to restate my point, those costs are simply a part of overhead and not the business of users. Unless the users are given an opt-out first and foremost, they're owed ownership over their personal data.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#215

Post by jdp23 »

encryptluks2 wrote: post #198
jdp23 wrote: post #171

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep. We've fought them off here in Washington ... but they and Amazon just took it to other, more pliable states. Todd Feathers and Albert Ng had a very good article on this in The Markup a few months ago https://themarkup.org/privacy/2022/05/26/tech-industry-group...

Did we though? What bills does Washington have that could compare to the CCPA?

None yet. Big tech companies have pushed various versions of the Bad Washington Privacy Act, which is weaker than CCPA. In 2021 and 2022, civil liberties, civil rights, and immigrant rights groups have supported the People's Privacy Act, which is a lot stronger than CCPA or ADPPA, but tech lobbying kept it from even getting a hearing. We'll see what happens in 2023 ... the Bad Washington Privacy Act's sponsor is retiring from the Senate (and is generally expected to become a full-time lobbyist), so the landscape should be different.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#216

Post by kmeisthax »

donatj wrote: post #50

Now if we could just get a bill that actually limited the governments ability to collect data on its citizens. I'm not really worried about targeted ads, I'm worried about targeted assassinations. You talk to people and ask them why they are worried about companies collecting data, and a certain percentage will tell you they don't like that the government could get it with a court order. That'd be a HUGE improvement…

Fun fact: the lack of this is actually THE reason why Google Fonts is banned in the EU right now

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#217

Post by takeda »

jdp23 wrote: post #48

It's not clear that ADPPA will move forward. The current version preempts California's CCPA/CPRA legislation, and (big surprise) California doesn't like that. But, that's far from the only issue with it. Here's an update from a couple of weeks ago which discusses some of the problems, as well as potential next steps. https://thenexusofprivacy.net/adppa-new-compromise/ And, here's EFF's position: " Americans Deserve M…

That's weird that it was implement to preempt. Normally bills add on top of each other so why it is different here?

As a Californian I would prefer that bills add additional protections especially when it comes to privacy.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#218

Post by takeda »

jfengel wrote: post #204
nugget wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preemption would be an enormous mistake. Federal legislation moves at a glacial pace. In a field like privacy, you may only get to pass one substantial bill every 10 or 15 years. Technology moves too quickly for lawmakers at the Federal level to keep up. States can move much faster. Justice Brandeis popularized the phrase that "[the] states are the laboratories of democracy" and digital privacy law is a text book cas…

States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws. The Internet is a global entity, and it doesn't strike me as being well served by the "laboratory of the states". Federal legislation is slow, but executive agencies can move faster if they are empowered by legislation to make rules. Congress sets broad principles, and it's not unreasonable that those principl…

> States move faster... so fast that a technology company would be constantly chasing 50 different state laws.

As a person who's data is being sold I would one up it and wish that each county would produce their own regulations. That business is a cancer.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#219

Post by root_axis »

noasaservice wrote: post #59
guerrilla wrote: post #52

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a lot worse than I imagined. So basically this would be terrible or meaningless for workers/consumers?

So basically, this is a mostly toothless law, that requires small companies to follow to the extreme detriment of the large companies... which already likely do the bare minimum. I'm not sure of the term. It's like a regulatory legal barrier that keeps new companies from entering the market.

> So basically, this is a mostly toothless law, that requires small companies to follow to the extreme detriment of the large companies

The bill outlines exemptions for business making less than 40 million annually. I haven't read the whole thing so it's possible I missed something, could you point out which sections you're referring to to draw that conclusion?

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#220

Post by autoexec »

JumpCrisscross wrote: post #186
nugget wrote: post #131

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Preemption would be an enormous mistake. Federal legislation moves at a glacial pace. In a field like privacy, you may only get to pass one substantial bill every 10 or 15 years. Technology moves too quickly for lawmakers at the Federal level to keep up. States can move much faster. Justice Brandeis popularized the phrase that "[the] states are the laboratories of democracy" and digital privacy law is a text book cas…

> Preemption would be an enormous mistake It creates a national standard. If we’re still debating the solution, sure, devolve to states. But if we’re near consensus, preëmption provides scale. This is American strength in a nutshell.

Yeah, nobody wants to have to constantly worry about compliance with 50+ different required standards which may or may not conflict with one another. Having one clear standard for services to follow is absolutely preferred so long as it actually does the job of protecting people's data privacy.
Post reply on HN