84% want stronger online privacy laws, but Congress's corruption stalls progress

Post by eru » Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 1:58 PM UTC

seydor wrote: post #28

repelsteeltje wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like flagship corporations have a horrible business model if employees are highly-payed to invade privacy. I'm sure, those companies have enough smart people to figure out some way to create high-paying jobs that do not rely on invasion of privacy. [Added] ...if only they were incentivized to do so

One could say that Norway's flagship corporation has a horrible business model. The Norwegians have never held a referendum whether they should stop drilling , but they are so environmentally conscious that it's not unlikely. Should Norway stop drilling and let its sovereign fund collapse (along with the value of many global companies where it invests)? Is there any State that is purely moral?

Post by throw_pm23 » Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 1:58 PM UTC

seydor wrote: post #28

repelsteeltje wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That sounds like flagship corporations have a horrible business model if employees are highly-payed to invade privacy. I'm sure, those companies have enough smart people to figure out some way to create high-paying jobs that do not rely on invasion of privacy. [Added] ...if only they were incentivized to do so

One could say that Norway's flagship corporation has a horrible business model. The Norwegians have never held a referendum whether they should stop drilling , but they are so environmentally conscious that it's not unlikely. Should Norway stop drilling and let its sovereign fund collapse (along with the value of many global companies where it invests)? Is there any State that is purely moral?

Post by [deleted] » Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 1:59 PM UTC

soco wrote: post #21

glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

Is this a trickle-down style of argument? Or that corporations are holy? Or that they always have the job takers interests at heart? Or that the elected representatives are elected by the 16% who don't want stronger privacy laws? I'm confused.

Post by benterix » Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 2:01 PM UTC

glitchc wrote: post #7

The real truth is that strong privacy laws would cause economic harm to flagship corporations. That would have a ripple effect on the economy as those corporations are responsible for thousands of high-paying jobs. The elected representatives know that people care more about the economy (specifically what's in their wallets) than about privacy.

Post by codedokode » Thu, Aug 22, 2024, 2:03 PM UTC

zooq_ai wrote: post #13

This is just another clueless populist article. The key to actually ask people "What are you willing to give up for X"? Are you ok being more annoyed with popups asking your permissions every time? Are you ok with a recession in Ad-based ecosystem (merchants, ad brokers, stock market depression, fewer IPOs) that may result due to this? Would you be OK with paying for services instead of an Ad model? (and before Virtu…