I’m too cynical because at this point I can only believe this is to help billionaires and ICE hide their identities/money, or it’s to strip away all privacy (as bills are often named the opposite of their purpose).
Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
21–30 of 79 posts
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#22Haha. This will accomplish nothing, because the surveillance dragnet is built and used by the people themselves, who deliberately (ab)use the very technologies that enable this breach of privacy at scale. Can't have your cake and eat it too.
It will probably accomplish nothing for other reasons. There are secret laws in this country which violate the constitution. I don't think the average person appreciates privacy as much as they should. But saying they are complicit in the making of this mess is going way too far. There are not so many choices in tech as you think. The most private ones require high technical expertise, and involve risks other than those presented by corporate tech. For example, you may have to trust a small number of unpaid individuals (who may even be anonymous) to deliver software.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#23The bill bans making access to a service contingent on consent. This would kill Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram and basically every other ad supported service. Making subscriptions the only consumer business model would be bad imo.
nonsense.
You could have a mail client with a static banner ad at the top.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#24The bill bans making access to a service contingent on consent. This would kill Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram and basically every other ad supported service. Making subscriptions the only consumer business model would be bad imo.
a) It wouldn't kill them. They would have to change their business model though.
b) Shouldn't our laws prioritize natural-persons over corporate desires?
Companies don't have a right to a specific revenue model. Humans should have a right to their own identity.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#25The oligarchs would roll on the ground laughing at this cute desire from the plebs for a few crumbs. The system is so corrupt and bought, it doesn't matter if this passes or not because it will be diluted, unenforced, and/or overturned by a largely corrupt legislature, executive, and judiciary. All hopeful this time™ feel-good efforts will turn to shit until the corruption is sufficiently removed and prevented. No amount of idealist wishing, "trying", protesting, or campaigning for a single issue can materially change the reality of extremely corrupt, criminal elites having captured the important levers of power. That's reality. Therefore, the first order of business is fixing the corruption before all other single issue advocacy can be addressed.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#26I appreciate the sentiment, but this doesn't really seem to put itself in the context of the state of play at the federal level. Namely, pro-privacy states have existing legislation they want to be the 'floor' of privacy protections, and anti-privacy states want to use a federal bill to preempt those laws, making the federal law the ceiling that they can lower in one fell swoop. There are real risks to a federal law that preempts state legislation.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#27What percentage of this is lawslop?
https://github.com/righttoprivacyact/bill/tree/main/tests
There’s clearly a non-trivial level of LLM involvement.
I want to say 100% lawslop. I can’t figure out who’s behind this to ascertain their qualifications and acumen in the space.
100% seems like a safe place to start speculating from but I can be talked down.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#28>Update CAN-SPAM for one-click deletion of email addresses from databases. Then how can I know not to send you another email if I don't have your email flagged in my database to do-not-send?
Wouldn't a hash work great for this purpose? I.e. 1. User requests for email alice@example.com to be removed from database 2. Company removes "alice@example.com" from 'emails' table 3. Company adds 00b7d3...eff98f to 'do_not_send' table Later on, the company buys emails from some other third-party, and Alice's email is on that list. The company can hash all the email addresses they received, and remove the emails wit…
So in the end, they have a list of emails that match the hashes in their blacklist? What's the point?
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#29What percentage of this is lawslop? https://github.com/righttoprivacyact/bill/tree/main/tests There’s clearly a non-trivial level of LLM involvement. I want to say 100% lawslop. I can’t figure out who’s behind this to ascertain their qualifications and acumen in the space. 100% seems like a safe place to start speculating from but I can be talked down.
As opposed to bills sponsored by real people that completely decimated privacy? Patriot Act?
I’ll take slop that has some semblance of reasonable privacy protection any day.
Re: Federal Right to Privacy Act – Draft legislation
#30The bill bans making access to a service contingent on consent. This would kill Gmail, Google Maps, Facebook, Instagram and basically every other ad supported service. Making subscriptions the only consumer business model would be bad imo.
The impacts of the model that BigTech currently follows closely resemble those of product dumping. Effectively banning that model would mean alternative subscription based platforms would stand a much better chance of succeeding than they currently do.