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

84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

techdirt.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 116 posts

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#11

Post by 23B1 »

glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

This is an interesting argument I've heard from various quarters but have never seen any evidentiary material supporting it. Do you have any reliable sources that explore this correlation?

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#12

Post by lenerdenator »

aurizon wrote: post #2

In a party based assembly(UK, Canada) the party leader tells each party member how to vote = the party line. Members can not vote against the party = out. In the US assembly(Congress and Senate) each members votes as he/she wishes. In all houses the votes(hands) are visible. This turns a vote into a currency. A lobbyist can see he gets what he has paid for and the 'bag' is passed. Every US voter has what both the Sen…

> I wonder if the Supreme Court can interpret the current laws to ensure a secret ballot?

There is no way the current bench on the Supreme Court of the United States of America does any sort of interpreting towards a stronger administrative state, regardless of popular support for it.

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#13

Post by zooq_ai »

This is just another clueless populist article.

The key to actually ask people "What are you willing to give up for X"?

Are you ok being more annoyed with popups asking your permissions every time?

Are you ok with a recession in Ad-based ecosystem (merchants, ad brokers, stock market depression, fewer IPOs) that may result due to this?

Would you be OK with paying for services instead of an Ad model? (and before Virtue signaling HNers jump in, how many of you have subscribed to YouTube premium)

Any idiot will say Yes to "Do you want $1000?"

Change the question to reality "Do you want $1000, but have to pay back $1100 tomorrow?" and see the numbers drop.

Passing legislations has to deal with reality. Do lobbyists influencing law making? Yes. But the lobbyists is a necessary evil because general population will always want $1000. Lobbyists are there to remind you of the costs and prevent from populism destroying civilizations.

Edit : Expected nothing better than downvotes from massively brainwashed HNers with ZERO independent thinking. The irony isn't lost that they are the 84% ers

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#15

Post by DarkNova6 »

glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

Or perhaps it forces those companies to focus on products instead of exploiting their market position.

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#16

Post by zooq_ai »

Retric wrote: post #9
glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

Privacy has minimal overall economic impact because of the zero sum nature of advertising. Specific companies get harmed, but advertisers don’t suddenly have less money if advertising is less targeted. Net result that money is simply going to support different jobs. Similarly with more/less efficient advertising consumers have just as much money so total spending stays the same, so the only change is which companies…

This is clueless understanding of economics (and very prevalent in HN)

Economics 101 : There is no fixed pie of $$$$. $$ (as in wealth, productivity) can absolutely disappear from the economy or grow from nothing.

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#17

Post by zooq_ai »

23B1 wrote: post #11
glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

This is an interesting argument I've heard from various quarters but have never seen any evidentiary material supporting it. Do you have any reliable sources that explore this correlation?

Yeah, just ask your favorite merchant how much it hurt their business and how many business shut down or lay off people due to Apple Tracking ban

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#18

Post by linotype »

zooq_ai wrote: post #13

This is just another clueless populist article. The key to actually ask people "What are you willing to give up for X"? Are you ok being more annoyed with popups asking your permissions every time? Are you ok with a recession in Ad-based ecosystem (merchants, ad brokers, stock market depression, fewer IPOs) that may result due to this? Would you be OK with paying for services instead of an Ad model? (and before Virtu…

> Are you ok being more annoyed with popups asking your permissions every time?

No, I’m really not. The EU regulation that caused every site to have a stupid cookie pop-up/banner has made the Web a significantly poorer experience.

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#19

Post by Retric »

zooq_ai wrote: post #16
Retric wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Privacy has minimal overall economic impact because of the zero sum nature of advertising. Specific companies get harmed, but advertisers don’t suddenly have less money if advertising is less targeted. Net result that money is simply going to support different jobs. Similarly with more/less efficient advertising consumers have just as much money so total spending stays the same, so the only change is which companies…

This is clueless understanding of economics (and very prevalent in HN) Economics 101 : There is no fixed pie of $$$$. $$ (as in wealth, productivity) can absolutely disappear from the economy or grow from nothing.

The economy grows or shrinks with productivity but advertising specifically is zero sum. Coke vs Pepsi makes a great deal of difference to those specific companies and little else.

If anything it’s slightly negative due to inefficiency because the winner isn’t the best product.

Re: 84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

#20

Post by 4RealFreedom »

aurizon wrote: post #2

In a party based assembly(UK, Canada) the party leader tells each party member how to vote = the party line. Members can not vote against the party = out. In the US assembly(Congress and Senate) each members votes as he/she wishes. In all houses the votes(hands) are visible. This turns a vote into a currency. A lobbyist can see he gets what he has paid for and the 'bag' is passed. Every US voter has what both the Sen…

Why not keep everything transparent and make lobbying illegal? I know neither secret voting or making lobbying illegal will ever happen but it seems like you're just putting a bandaid on an issue without regard for the consequences. People that vote for representatives like to know how they vote. Why even have the theater of a transparent vote that does nothing?
Post reply on HN