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

Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

politico.eu

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 709 posts

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#531

Post by etiennebausson »

nosianu wrote: post #446
iso1631 wrote: post #383

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> “Of course, we need some data centers,” he says. But he wants us to talk about restructuring the way the Internet works so they are not so necessary. I'm waiting for them to suggest it should be moved to the cloud rather than put in data centres. This is a symptom of widespread technological illiteracy, globally (at least in the west)

Ah - now I actually have to come to his defense. Because I only quoted the part immediately after this one and thought it was enough: > Ruiter says he’s continued to talk about data centers because he wants to remind people that “the cloud” they’ve come to rely on isn’t just an ethereal concept—it’s something that has a physical manifestation, here in the farmland of North Holland. He worries that growing demand for…

I would very much like politicians that knowledgeable and articulate in my country.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#532

Post by khazhoux »

austinl wrote: post #427
fofoz wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am also writing from Italy. In the last few months I have received so many spam calls from UK numbers that I have been forced to ban the whole of Britain from my phone. Good job Data Protection authority.

In the US, I used to receive multiple spam calls a day. A few years ago, I turned on the iOS setting that sends all phone numbers not in my contacts straight to voicemail and haven't looked back. It's occasionally inconvenient—maybe once or twice a year I deal with a company that needs to call me. But if it's a call from a real person, I can always listen to the voicemail and call them back. Most spam calls either do…

> I turned on the iOS setting that sends all phone numbers not in my contacts straight to voicemail and haven't looked back.

And the real-life version of this: you're not morally required to open the front door (or even acknowledge) if you don't knock the person ringing your doorbell. You can actually just... ignore them.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#533

Post by etiennebausson »

nivenkos wrote: post #282
cft wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm an American that have been living in Europe for 15 months. My perspective is that Europe is ruled by old aristocracy that is happy with the way the life is. They're very afraid of any change, especially of giving people something constructive to do on a large scale. Another reason might be that Europe went through the two World wars, and therefore they're generally scared of any change.

Yeah everything is geared towards the aristocracy - like VAT and Income Tax are insanely high meanwhile there is often no land value tax, property tax, inheritance tax, wealth tax or gift tax at all. And even capital gains are taxed far less than income. I think it's more that the US was made up of immigrants so it got to start anew without a massive established aristocracy and monarchies.

The U.S. have had centuries now to re-build dynasties, and they have, from industry to politics.

There is an issue on the capital gain / income in the E.U., but my understanding was that the U.S. was even worse in that regard (people can live of their salary through most of Europe).

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#534

Post by cccbbbaaa »

dylan604 wrote: post #319
jodrellblank wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you seriously confused why governments regulate what can be put in food and sold to the public? Here's a classic for you, one of the early incidents which lead to this kind of regulation: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1858_Bradford_sweets_poisoning Here's some more contemporary links: https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/food-improvement-agents/add... https://food.ec.europa.eu/safety/food-improvement-agents/fla... Wh…

The fact that something called "flavouring substance" is a thing makes me shake my head. >Are you seriously confused why governments regulate what can be put in food and sold to the public? Are these the same regulators that allowed Olestra to be used? sidebar--just to check the spelling of Olestra, I used the Mac's force click dictionary access: "Origin 1980s: from (p)ol(y)est(e)r + the suffix -a." WTF? Seriously? W…

As I can't find when olestra products were sold in the EU, the answer seems to be “no”. Don't hesitate to prove me wrong though.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#535

Post by amelius »

dagorenouf wrote: post #130

Europe on top of innovation once again. Watch out US and China! /s (I say this as a French citizen)

> Europe on top of innovation once again.

There's plenty of innovation happening in Europe. See e.g. ASML.

What Europe is not good at is generating a lot of hype around something. Which has probably something to do with the investor climate there.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#536

Post by Zurrrrr »

swores wrote: post #429
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #392

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Here's an example of that not being true: That's not an example at all. I'm talking specifics here. The GDPR is the first law of it's kind that just outright asserts jurisdiction anywhere, as long as the origin took some data from an EU citizen. That is absolutely unprecedented. I'm not aware of any remotely similar law in commerce or communications in any other country. Megaupload is about an international seizure…

I don't really see how to argue further since you seem to be intentionally missing the point and looking for minor pedantic nuances that don't actually change the situation. So I'll let you know that I still think you're entirely wrong, and agree to disagree.

That's fine, I respect you ending the discussion if you don't feel headway can be reached.

I will say I feel you are missing my point, and that you are claiming things like COPPA are equivalent because you are at a higher level of abstraction. When you get more specific, you will see that I am correct.

Cheers.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#537

Post by Zurrrrr »

Veen wrote: post #431
Zurrrrr wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Reportedly some of the happiest people on earth They seem pretty far from the Scandinavian countries. Besides, I'd find it hard to trust any results from a totalitarian country. > It sounds insane to you because you’re used to the filth we live in and don’t even see the decay that’s all around us anymore. Crime and violence are normal in our world and a government that won’t tolerate it is a foreign concept. There…

Singapore is a parliamentary democracy with elected members of parliament and president. It is certainly not a "totalitarian country", although it could be considered authoritarian compared to western democracies.

You're right, I used the wrong term. I'd say Singapore is still authoritarian in a vacuum though, western democracies aside.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#538

Post by Zurrrrr »

stametseater wrote: post #438
Zurrrrr wrote: post #393

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm not trolling. Just because it might be a very pleasant place to live doesn't mean it isn't also totalitarian. They charge people coming into their country if they have weed in their system (or their law allows them to and it seems they enforce it enough that countries warn their citizens), breaking no law in their country, and quite likely adhering to the law in their country of origin. They make suicide illegal…

> breaking no law in their country Singaporean law forbids their citizens and residents from using drugs in other countries. So if a Singapore resident goes to Amsterdam or Portland and smokes a joint there, they are complying with local laws but still breaking Singaporean laws. Laws with this sort of extraterritorial jurisdiction aren't without precedent. Particularly, other countries, like the US, UK and many other…

> Singaporean law forbids their citizens and residents from using drugs in other countries.

The problem is with that law being applied to non-residents. If Singapore wants to police it's citizens lik that, it's fine.

But to arrest a Canadian because they smoked weed a couple of days before arriving at Singpore customs, where it's legal in Montreal where they were?

> With that I agree, but I think a better word to describe Singapore is 'authoritarian.'

Another user pointed that out and I agree entirely. I exaggerated/resorted to hyperbole more than intended.

Re: Italian privacy regulator bans ChatGPT

#539

Post by Zurrrrr »

yibg wrote: post #443
PrimeMcFly wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nope. If I want to sell data in the EU, I can. I'm not subject to their laws unless I have a presence there. GDPR tries to change that. See https://www2.deloitte.com/ch/en/pages/risk/articles/gdpr-ext...

Why is shipping data different? If a certain drug is illegal in the country but not yours do you think you should be allow to sell and ship the drug over?

I mean, drugs would be a problem in both the sending and receiving country, often for both sender and receiver if caught.

This is more like me deciding to try and sue people in other countries because they said something I didn't like on the internet.

Post reply on HN