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

EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

261–270 of 332 posts

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#261

Post by M2Ys4U »

danielfoster wrote: post #199

> Furthermore, the law specifies that local officials can send cross-border orders to make tech firms remove content or provide access to information, wherever their EU headquarter is based. The article goes on to give an example of how Amsterdam could use the law to request earnings data for local hosts from Airbnb. The way the BBC explains it, this law would give EU governments ready access to user data with no ove…

These Regulations are explicitly without prejudice to data protection legislation, including the GDPR and LED.

In other words, if there's a conflict between the GDPR and the DSM then the GDPR prevails.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#262

Post by themacguffinman »

AntiImperialist wrote: post #260
themacguffinman wrote: post #239

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Perhaps in the short term, but regulating Big Tech to the ground is not really in the EU's long term interest. I suspect it will actually setback its own tech industry relative to global players for the meagre benefit of temporarily slowing down Big Tech in the EU market.

That's not how international trade works. You can regulate your competitors differently.

Ok, but it doesn't look like they are. These are broad EU digital market rules. Blatant protectionism isn't popular in developed countries (except in certain industries, not this one at least).

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#263

Post by SllX »

bonoboTP wrote: post #255
SllX wrote: post #245

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now there are some new regulations for bigger entities. What's the problem? "Size" of business is an arbitrary and meritless distinction.

Size matters a lot. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25419085 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25432581

Is the problem the license plates or the license plate readers?

This is not a strong argument for the merits of “size” of business in the context of lawmaking. This demonstrates the privacy defects of what is a law enforcement tool intended for vehicle identification.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#264

Post by IgorPartola »

SllX wrote: post #200
Tainnor wrote: post #195

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The difference is that Apple is not a government Yes, and this is a key difference between Europeans and (at least the libertarian/SV type of) Americans. We trust governments more than corporations because governments were elected by us. It's really a difference in culture.

That’s an interesting point, but I don’t think it’s a matter of trusting one type of organization more than another. I think we (Americans) don’t trust either without cause, and there’s more corporations than governments so there’s more opportunities to find corporations, actually scratch that, businesses, big or small, that we trust. But by default, I think we trust both about as far as we can throw them and busines…

The difference is that in the US we don’t trust the government to the point where even though that’s the one we have more control over, we do not choose to use it against bad corporate behavior for fear that the government will do it wrong. The EU sees that it can effectively regulate corporations so they use their government the way it was intended to.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#265

Post by Grimm1 »

LudwigNagasena wrote: post #253
Grimm1 wrote: post #247

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The argument that since they're a private platform they should be able to do what they want. I don't think it's ever been a blanket argument globally because the concept of a private entity is very different from nation to nation.

I am not sure anyone aside from a tiny minority of hardcore libertarians believes that "since they're a private platform they should be able to do what they want" is a valid argument.

Sure, I think I'd agree there but the OP phrased this like "Take that all you people who have been saying this" I was like that must be a fraction of a fraction of people who were.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#266

Post by Xixi »

jariel wrote: post #69
avianlyric wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> quite a big step in assuming control over the lives of residents. Have you heard of laws and governments before? This is exactly what they do, it’s also why democracy is such a big thing. If you’re gonna give that much power to an organisation, you want to make sure you can change it if start going off the rails. > The EU didn't create its citizens (unlike Apple which created its products); It might not have “creat…

"do, it’s also why democracy is such a big thing" Voters of France and Netherlands strongly rejected the treaty upon which the EU derives is legitimacy. Referendums were cancelled elsewhere. Ursula von der Leyen did not receive any votes, she wasn't even part of the process, she was an unknown German figure until after the election, when she was plucked from obscurity by actors acting in total opacity, behind closed…

It's only opaque if you don't care enough to study the question. Ursula von der Leyen was chosen by the members of the European Council.

The European Council, among other responsibilities, "decides on the EU's overall direction and political priorities", and "nominates and appoints candidates to certain high profile EU level roles, such as the ECB and the Commission". [1] If you have to know only one thing about the EU, it's that one: power lies in the hand of the European Council.

The current members of the European Council are: Alexander De Croo for Belgium, Boyko Borisov for Bulgaria, Andrej Babiš for the Czech Republic, Mette Frederiksen for Denmark, Angela Merkel for Germany, Jüri Ratas for Estonia, Micheál Martin for Ireland, Kyriakos Mitsotakis for Greece, Pedro Sánchez for Spain, Emmanuel Macron for France, Andrej Plenković for Croatia, Giuseppe Conte for Italy, Nicos Anastasiades for Cyprus, Krišjānis Kariņš for Latvia, Gitanas Nausėda for Lithuania, Xavier Bettel for Luxembourg, Viktor Orbán for Hungary, Robert Abela for Malta, Mark Rutte for the Netherlands, Sebastian Kurz for Austria, Mateusz Morawiecki for Poland, António Costa for Portugal, Klaus Iohannis for Romania, Janez Janša for Slovenia, Igor Matovič for the Slovak Republic, Sanna Marin for Finland, and finally Stefan Löfven for Sweden.

If you don't like the direction of the EU, ask your representant to do something about it. Otherwise pick another one. They are all democratically elected (directly, or indirectly in parliamentary systems).

[1] https://europa.eu/european-union/about-eu/institutions-bodie...

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#267

Post by SllX »

IgorPartola wrote: post #264
SllX wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s an interesting point, but I don’t think it’s a matter of trusting one type of organization more than another. I think we (Americans) don’t trust either without cause, and there’s more corporations than governments so there’s more opportunities to find corporations, actually scratch that, businesses, big or small, that we trust. But by default, I think we trust both about as far as we can throw them and busines…

The difference is that in the US we don’t trust the government to the point where even though that’s the one we have more control over, we do not choose to use it against bad corporate behavior for fear that the government will do it wrong. The EU sees that it can effectively regulate corporations so they use their government the way it was intended to.

Governments are self-executing power vehicles. Ascribing intent onto them isn’t particularly useful when a government has a mechanism for rewriting its reason foe existence through law.

That said:

> The EU sees that it can effectively regulate corporations so they use their government the way it was intended to.

What is the basis for your claims on their effectiveness?

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#268

Post by Aerroon »

manfredo wrote: post #54
kapilkaisare wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn't 10% too low a number to consider a platform systemic?

Maybe. I could see sites removing access to less profitable users, probably in lower income countries to stay below the 45 million threshold. Or perhaps boot low-engagement users in order to keep user-counts below the threshold. When regulation exists with a threshold, enterprises will strive to stay below it. Hence why there's such a huge drop-off in businesses with 50 or more employees in France [1] [2]. 1. https:/…

That could still be an improvement. It would mean that the reach of those sites can't grow beyond 10% in the EU. Other sites would then pick up the users that were left out.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#269

Post by Aerroon »

Veedrac wrote: post #88
throwaway894345 wrote: post #7

> The operators of online platforms - such as social media apps and video-sharing sites of any size - must prioritise complaints raised by "trusted flaggers", who have a track record of highlighting valid problems. Who determines which problems are valid? Unless I overlooked something, this article seems really vague. > Likewise, all online stores must be able to trace traders selling goods via their platforms, in ca…

https://ec.europa.eu/info/sites/info/files/proposal_for_a_re... --- Article 19, Trusted flaggers 2. The status of trusted flaggers under this Regulation shall be awarded, upon application by any entities, by the Digital Services Coordinator of the Member State in which the applicant is established, where the applicant has demonstrated to meet all of the following conditions: (a) it has particular expertise and compet…

This sounds like it's something akin to YouTubecs DMCA process. I doubt that they will do a good job making sure that trusted flaggers won't abuse their power.

Re: EU reveals plan to regulate Big Tech

#270

Post by jevgeni »

SllX wrote: post #179
username90 wrote: post #150

Earlier quoted context omitted.

EU have about much power to imprison you as Apple does, as in they can't unless they can convince the local police you have committed some crime. They lack power compared to US feds.

They’re still a collaborative governmental entity with governments enforcing its laws, so they pass muster as far as being a “State” goes, unless you want to go into specifics about the various treaties and how this is really a treaty organization and blah. In the looks, walks and quacks like a duck, with all the other ducks around treating it like a duck, it’s a bloody government with all the powers that entails, ev…

> it’s a bloody government with all the powers that entails

Still doesn’t have any physical police authority.

Post reply on HN