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

181–190 of 313 posts

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#181

Post by tagawa »

shishy wrote: post #29
cyral wrote: post #3

I see they are also annoyed at cookie banners: > SEC. 210. UNIFIED OPT-OUT MECHANISMS. For the rights established under sections 204(b) and (c), and section 206(c)(3)(D) not later than 18 months after the date of enactment of this Act, the Commission shall establish one or more acceptable privacy protective, centralized mechanisms, including global privacy signals such as browser or device privacy settings, for indiv…

Was scanning for this thanks for pointing it out. Some of these banners are infuriating, and if I use firefox containers sometimes I see them over and over, especially if I'm clearing my cookies. It is insane to me that this isn't already a standard.

There is a standard that has some recognition and uptake (though needs more) - Global Privacy Control. It’s been adopted by some browsers and publishers, and IIRC is a requirement for CCPA (California Consumer Privacy Act) compliance. https://globalprivacycontrol.org/

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#182

Post by tomatotomato37 »

ahtihn wrote: post #116
tomatotomato37 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's almost like blindly calling for regulation without accounting for the political/monetary influence of those being regulated is a bad idea or something

> blindly calling for regulation [...] is a bad idea What do you expect people to do instead?

It's like a genie wish. You have to be very specific in what you are asking for.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#183

Post by prego_xo »

legitster wrote: post #102
prego_xo wrote: post #7

> (B) any time beyond the initial 2 times described in subparagraph (A), may allow the individual to exercise such right for a reasonable fee for each request. Paying any sum of money to receive a copy of or request to delete my private data is unreasonable in nature.

I mean, at our company, GDPR requests have to cost at least $50 a pop. It goes to a human team to review and process with a dedicated legal representative.

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.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#184

Post by rt4mn »

matai_kolila wrote: post #163
rt4mn wrote: post #144

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1984 was published in 1949. It is partially science fiction . Tricorders are not literally the same as cell phones, either, but if you ignore the parrelels you are doing a disservice to the important role and lessons of good sci-fi. The thing I tell most people is that we currently live under more surveillance then folks in 1984. "You had to live—did live, from habit that became instinct—in the assumption that every…

I couldn’t disagree more strongly; the fact that you can write this and not worry for the rest of your life about being killed is the whole point. I urge you to reread 1984, and focus on how people who broke the rules were treated. People weren’t deplatformed or cancelled, they were murdered.

I do worry about being killed by the government. I worry about everything related to government abuse of power and surveillance. I wear my tinfoil with with pride, thank you very much.

On a more serious note (in case it was not clear that I was being facetious), you are absolute correct that an important theme (and, arguably, the primary / key message) of 1984 is to highlight the horror and dangers of a totalitarian government, and to push back against the very, very pressing danger of Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union.

But one of the great things about sci-fi / dystopian / utopian fiction is that it lets us look at a potential future, ask ourselves if thats a world we want to live in, and if its not, we can think about what it might take for us to go down that path, and what steps we should take if we want to avoid it.

You are right to point out that we dont live an a totalitarian surveillance state run by elites without respect for the rule of law. But my point is that we could, and that we currently do live in a surveillance state. It just happens to be a democratic surveillance state run by elected representatives of the people with a strong culture of respect of the rule of law. But its a surveillance state nevertheless.

I wont suggest you re-read 1984, but I would suggest taking a look at this opinion piece by Pussy Riot's Nadya Tolokonnikova: https://www.nytimesn7cgmftshazwhfgzm37qxb44r64ytbb2dj3x62d2l... (or i guess https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/26/opinion/navalny-russia.ht..., but I suggest the onion link)

Or at least the last paragraph: "Our president has only just recently had the law changed so that he can stay in power until 2036, but his program of repression didn’t start out this blatantly. These things happen in pieces, bit by bit, small acts. And each one may even seem relatively benign at first, perhaps bad, but not fatal. You get angry, maybe you speak out, but you get on with your life. The promise of our democracy was chipped away in pieces, one by one: corrupt cronies appointed, presidential orders issued, actions taken, laws passed, votes rigged. It happens slowly, intermittently; sometimes we couldn’t see how steadily. Autocracy crept in, like the coward it is."

Persistent mass surveillance is not mentioned. Abusive government surveillance tends to fly under the radar. But one of the lessons of 1984 is that you ignore it at your peril.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#186

Post by JumpCrisscross »

nugget wrote: post #131
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…

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.

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#187

Post by [deleted] »

rt4mn wrote: post #184
matai_kolila wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t disagree more strongly; the fact that you can write this and not worry for the rest of your life about being killed is the whole point. I urge you to reread 1984, and focus on how people who broke the rules were treated. People weren’t deplatformed or cancelled, they were murdered.

I do worry about being killed by the government. I worry about everything related to government abuse of power and surveillance. I wear my tinfoil with with pride, thank you very much. On a more serious note (in case it was not clear that I was being facetious), you are absolute correct that an important theme (and, arguably, the primary / key message) of 1984 is to highlight the horror and dangers of a totalitarian…

[deleted]

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#188

Post by [deleted] »

[deleted] wrote: post #187
rt4mn wrote: post #184

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I do worry about being killed by the government. I worry about everything related to government abuse of power and surveillance. I wear my tinfoil with with pride, thank you very much. On a more serious note (in case it was not clear that I was being facetious), you are absolute correct that an important theme (and, arguably, the primary / key message) of 1984 is to highlight the horror and dangers of a totalitarian…

[deleted]

[deleted]

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#189

Post by matai_kolila »

rt4mn wrote: post #184
matai_kolila wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I couldn’t disagree more strongly; the fact that you can write this and not worry for the rest of your life about being killed is the whole point. I urge you to reread 1984, and focus on how people who broke the rules were treated. People weren’t deplatformed or cancelled, they were murdered.

I do worry about being killed by the government. I worry about everything related to government abuse of power and surveillance. I wear my tinfoil with with pride, thank you very much. On a more serious note (in case it was not clear that I was being facetious), you are absolute correct that an important theme (and, arguably, the primary / key message) of 1984 is to highlight the horror and dangers of a totalitarian…

I don't disagree or agree with what you've written generally here, but specifically speaking 1984 is not a reflection of current reality for Americans, and you seem to agree with that.

That's an important point, and I think there are a lot of folks who would try to disagree. There are people in this very comment thread that believe 1984 is not a work of fiction, and that's silly. Those are the people I'm disagreeing with.

I'm not really interested in generic, "society is falling apart" conversations, as every society ever has been saying that about different things, and yes they even followed up with, "No but for us it's real!"

Re: American Data Privacy and Protection Act

#190

Post by carom »

2OEH8eoCRo0 wrote: post #124
chitowneats wrote: post #80

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's insane enough letting Big Corps lobby your legislature and even write language that eventually gets enshrined as law. It's even more insane we allow the state-affiliated entities of our adversaries to do this.

Freedom of speech. All they do is pay people to speak for them. They have money to do that. Gifts and other tomfoolery is obviously no good but I'm not sure how you could gate this without running afoul of the first amendment.

It's pretty simple, you pass an amendment that says corporations are not people for the purpose of political spending.
Post reply on HN