Google refuses to translate this webpage to me, are there any chances it does it because Google refuses to ship the criticism of Google?
Firefox's offline translation is pretty reasonable these days.
Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
121–130 of 138 posts
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#122Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't understand, Doctorow of course uses enshittification all the time but I've see "platform decay" used plenty of times as well. But also, plenty of "Serious" people seem to be discussing it Financial Times: The enshittification of apps is real. But is it bad? https://www.ft.com/content/acaf3fb1-d971-48ad-8efb-c82787cdd... Not in the title, but Warzel uses the term in his Atlantic article, "Streaming Has Reached…
These are individual media articles, not laws, not academic papers, not think tank reports, or anything that has actual legislative influence. Note that I wrote: > it limits the ability of lawmakers, academics, and other "serious" people to care about, discuss, or pass laws that aim to address this phenomenon. Now, to be fair, I don't think the word is going to sink the whole attempt. But I think it's just juvenile a…
There is a whole branch of policy that generally covers enshittification, it's just not called that. Consumer Protection (laws, agency and enforcement) are the answer.
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#123Earlier quoted context omitted.
What job is being lost when you are applying for a new job? > That's not how European courts have been interpreting it Any particular relevant cases I can lookup?
Firstly, the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from. The only thing opt-outable is the maximum of 48 hours work per week on average, and it is left to member states to legislate how that opt-out works (should they choose to have the opt-out at all). In the UK, to pick a specific example, it is a combination of some workers not being allowed a choice of opt-out (e.g. healthcare workers, s…
> the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from
Let's stop cherry picking. These CAN be altered by an employment contract:
> the 20-minute rest break for those who expect to work more than 6 hours in a day
> the daily rest of 11 hours in 24 hours
> the weekly rest of 24 hours in every 7 days or 48 hours in every 14 days
> the 17-week reference period for night work
> the average hours for night workers working with special hazards
> The reference period for working out the 48-hour average maximum working week can be changed from 17 weeks to 52 weeks
This is exactly my issue with these big EU directives and regulations. The EU gets massive press about the headline issue, and the nuance, opt-outs etc get swept under the rug
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#124Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yes, as I said, by putting it in the employment contract when applying for a job. Honestly it's hilarious how some people view GDPR. They think CEOs lose sleep at night worrying about it, that they might go to jail for it, or have to pay 100M Euro fine for a breach of it. It's simply not the case. The reality of EU directives and regulations are very different to how they are sold. Many people fall prey to the market…
> Many people fall prey to the marketing It seems you did fall prey to the anti-GDPR marketing. It's being actually enforced [0] and doesn't allow "all or nothing" pseudo-consent [1]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39813801 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39272861 ; (upd:) an even better link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40974361
I'm not implying or stating no fines are issued, so linking that some fines are issued is not a rebuttal. Also note that site does not track payments made.
The big headline fines serve as a nice bit of PR for the EU
> It seems you did fall prey to the anti-GDPR marketing.
Nice retort but I have not. Being critical of EU regulations and not an EU sycophant is not falling prey to "anti-GDPR" marketing.
I'm actually generally pro EU; I'm just tired of people (especially non-Europeans) implying we have absolute privacy, zero privacy issues, total wins against corporations etc.
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#125Earlier quoted context omitted.
What job is being lost when you are applying for a new job? > That's not how European courts have been interpreting it Any particular relevant cases I can lookup?
Firstly, the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from. The only thing opt-outable is the maximum of 48 hours work per week on average, and it is left to member states to legislate how that opt-out works (should they choose to have the opt-out at all). In the UK, to pick a specific example, it is a combination of some workers not being allowed a choice of opt-out (e.g. healthcare workers, s…
>>You can't advertise a job where you set the hours and those hours are on average over 48 hours per week. It's not a valid job and you are immediately in breach of statutory law.
https://www.acas.org.uk/working-time-rules/the-48-hour-weekl...
Every UK job I have ever seen has the opt out clause in the contract. And they always say "well you can just tell us and we'll remove it" but it's there by default, and they make it clear that they have 800 other applicants for every position so do you really want to risk it?
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#126Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firstly, the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from. The only thing opt-outable is the maximum of 48 hours work per week on average, and it is left to member states to legislate how that opt-out works (should they choose to have the opt-out at all). In the UK, to pick a specific example, it is a combination of some workers not being allowed a choice of opt-out (e.g. healthcare workers, s…
>>You can't advertise a job where you set the hours and those hours are on average over 48 hours per week. It's not a valid job and you are immediately in breach of statutory law. https://www.acas.org.uk/working-time-rules/the-48-hour-weekl ... Every UK job I have ever seen has the opt out clause in the contract. And they always say "well you can just tell us and we'll remove it" but it's there by default, and they m…
Exactly. Many CAN opt out of the 48 hour limit (and are forced to do so due to the employer-employee power imbalance)
> Every UK job I have ever seen has the opt out clause in the contract
Ditto.
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#127Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's not how European courts have been interpreting it. When they say "free consent" they do mean free as in beer, so a "consent or loose your job" provisions would almost certainly be thrown out.
What job is being lost when you are applying for a new job? > That's not how European courts have been interpreting it Any particular relevant cases I can lookup?
https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2024-12/edpb_opinion...
Is an example where GDPR consent is not considered free if the alternative is paying money.
If you do not get a job, this seems fairly analogous.
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#128Earlier quoted context omitted.
Firstly, the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from. The only thing opt-outable is the maximum of 48 hours work per week on average, and it is left to member states to legislate how that opt-out works (should they choose to have the opt-out at all). In the UK, to pick a specific example, it is a combination of some workers not being allowed a choice of opt-out (e.g. healthcare workers, s…
> the WTD makes mandatory a number of things that cannot be opted out from Let's stop cherry picking. These CAN be altered by an employment contract: > the 20-minute rest break for those who expect to work more than 6 hours in a day > the daily rest of 11 hours in 24 hours > the weekly rest of 24 hours in every 7 days or 48 hours in every 14 days > the 17-week reference period for night work > the average hours for n…
> These CAN be altered by an employment contract:
They CANNOT in a regular employment contract UNLESS it can be justified that the job specifically needs it. Even when employer is justified, the rest entitlement still exists and must be compensated for, and the employer requires appropriate justification if they cannot give that compensatory rest. And if they put themselves in this situation (where employees go beyond normal working time limits), they need to keep good records of time they did make their employees work, so they can confirm they haven't broken the law to the HSE when it comes knocking.
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#129Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Many people fall prey to the marketing It seems you did fall prey to the anti-GDPR marketing. It's being actually enforced [0] and doesn't allow "all or nothing" pseudo-consent [1]. [0] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39813801 [1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=39272861 ; (upd:) an even better link: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40974361
I'm not implying or stating no fines are issued, so linking that some fines are issued is not a rebuttal. Also note that site does not track payments made. The big headline fines serve as a nice bit of PR for the EU > It seems you did fall prey to the anti-GDPR marketing. Nice retort but I have not. Being critical of EU regulations and not an EU sycophant is not falling prey to "anti-GDPR" marketing. I'm actually gen…
> Being critical of EU regulations and not an EU sycophant is not falling prey to "anti-GDPR" marketing.
This is not "being critical":
>> Yes, as I said, by putting it in the employment contract when applying for a job.
It's a plain wrong interpretation of GDPR, as my links explain.
> I'm just tired of people (especially non-Europeans) implying we have absolute privacy, zero privacy issues, total wins against corporations etc.
Where did I (or somebody else) imply that?
Re: Cory Doctorow on how we lost the internet
#130The thing I don't understand is how unethical stuff like this comes to be built. Take the example where nurses with debt get lower wages because they are desperate. Some manager had to come up with this idea and then get various people to agree and then get a team of engineers to implement it. Thats a lot of people agreeing to do something so clearly evil (to me at least). Are there that many people who just don't ca…
If you read the article, he talks about this in this fourth constraint, labor:
> The final constraint, which did hold back platform decay for quite some time, is labor. Tech workers have historically been respected and well-paid, without unions. The power of tech workers did not come from solidarity, but from scarcity, Doctorow said. The minute bosses ordered tech workers to enshittify the product they were loyally working on, perhaps missing various important social and family events to ship it on time, those workers could say no—perhaps in a much more coarse way. Tech workers could simply walk across the street ""and have a new job by the end of the day"" if the boss persisted.
> So labor held off enshittification after competition, regulation, and interoperability were all systematically undermined and did so for quite some time—until the mass tech layoffs. There have been half a million tech workers laid off since 2023, more are announced regularly, sometimes in conjunction with raises for executive salaries and bonuses. Now, workers cannot turn their bosses down because there are ten others out there just waiting to take their job.