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

Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

theverge.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 1001 posts

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#141

Post by immibis »

stavros wrote: post #68
GardenLetter27 wrote: post #30

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can just set your browser not to send whichever cookies you don't want to. Cookies are a client-side technology. Why does the government need to be involved?

Because it's not like the browser has two thousand cookies per website, it only has one and then they share your data with the two thousand partners server-side. The government absolutely needs to be involved.

Actually it often is a separate cookie per tracker because that's convenient for the trackers. But the only reason they don't put in the effort to do it the way you said is that browsers don't have the feature to block individual cookies. If they did, they would.

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#142

Post by andrepd »

jdasdf wrote: post #120
danishSuri1994 wrote: post #110

I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.

> clearer safe harbors for small actors Different rules for different people huh? Just because you like the group you're benefiting and dislike the group you're harming doesn't mean that is good policy.

In literally no place in the world are the rules the same for running a multinational or running a lemonade stand. I feel this should be obvious.

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#143

Post by ivan_gammel »

jdasdf wrote: post #120
danishSuri1994 wrote: post #110

I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.

> clearer safe harbors for small actors Different rules for different people huh? Just because you like the group you're benefiting and dislike the group you're harming doesn't mean that is good policy.

>Different rules for different people huh?

That’s how efficient market works. The bigger are the players, the higher are the chances they will distort the market. You need to apply the force proportional to size to return market back to equilibrium at maximum performance. We have anti-trust laws for this reason, so nothing new, nothing special.

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#144

Post by LogicFailsMe »

aurareturn wrote: post #10
schnitzelstoat wrote: post #5

> One change that’s likely to please almost everyone is a reduction in Europe’s ubiquitous cookie banners and pop-ups. Under the new proposal, some “non-risk” cookies won’t trigger pop-ups at all, and users would be able to control others from central browser controls that apply to websites broadly. Finally!

So they finally admit that it was a mistake. Even EU government websites had annoying giant cookie banners. Yet, some how the vast majority of HN comments defend the cookie banners saying if you don't do anything "bad" then you don't need the banners.

every accusation is a confession you see...

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#145

Post by whstl »

arielcostas wrote: post #67
amelius wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we get the do-not-track header instead? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track Because that made more sense than the cookie banner ever did. Edit: it looks like there is a legal alternative now: Global Privacy Control.

Or a new, opt-in "Do-Track" that means consent to tracking, and anything else means tracking is not allowed. Why should it opt-out?

As long as there is Do-Not-Track as well, and companies must follow BOTH, this would be ok by me.

But this one alone opens the door to behavior similar to tracking cookies, where accepting all was easy and not accepting was hard af.

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#146

Post by cess11 »

jdasdf wrote: post #120
danishSuri1994 wrote: post #110

I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.

> clearer safe harbors for small actors Different rules for different people huh? Just because you like the group you're benefiting and dislike the group you're harming doesn't mean that is good policy.

I think most people agree that the state should be subject to harsher rules than you are, because it is large and powerful.

But you would actually prefer to be subject to the same rules as the state? I.e. typically nothing which isn't explicitly allowed is forbidden for you to do, you are forced to hand out copies of documents you produce, and so on?

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#147

Post by kazinator »

jdasdf wrote: post #120
danishSuri1994 wrote: post #110

I sympathize with the startup argument: heavy compliance costs can stifle early innovation. But the solution shouldn’t be “weaker rules.” It should be smarter rules, clearer safe harbors for small actors, browser-level consent primitives for users, and stronger enforcement against dark-pattern CMPs. That keeps privacy meaningful without killing small businesses.

> clearer safe harbors for small actors Different rules for different people huh? Just because you like the group you're benefiting and dislike the group you're harming doesn't mean that is good policy.

The problem is that an intellectually consistent position of being against "different rules for different people" means everywhere, in everything.

For instance, poor people should not have any tax breaks: everyone should pay exactly the same percentage of their income, like 15% all across the board or whatever.

Such ideas often have regressive effects.

However, I get it. When it comes to handling personal information, you simply can't say that the "little guys" don't have to follow all the rules, and can cheerfully mishandle personal information in some way.

Small operators have simpler structures and information systems; it should be easier for them to comply and show compliance, you would think (and maybe some of the requirements in the area can be simplified rather than rules waived.)

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#148

Post by zrn900 »

While this is being done to boost corporations, it also must be said that GDPR just did not work. It became impossible due to constant reinterpretations and decisions of the Eu courts over time. Big corps just violate it by counting the eventual fines as a cost of doing business. Small corps and individuals get shafted. It ended up like the 'regulatory moat building' that so frequently happens in the US.

Re: Europe is scaling back GDPR and relaxing AI laws

#149

Post by nonethewiser »

If the EU passed GDPR despite knowing it would be offensive to the US and big tech, why would they now care that it's offensive to the US and big tech?

The article claims this is because of big tech and Donald Trump. It just states that they have applied pressure. I would love to see more information on how those forces specifically are precipitating the change.

Meanwhile the EU commission claims that this is for the benefit the European tech sector.

>our companies, especially our start-ups and small businesses, are often held back by layers of rigid rules

The latter seems like the more obvious explanation and what critics said about GDPR all along.

Post reply on HN