I see everyone now in the Administration is implementing the "Art of the Deal" tactics. The same tactics that bankrupted every project Trump did.
US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
401–410 of 509 posts
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#402Earlier quoted context omitted.
Great. Where are the trillions of dollars that came from those inventions? In the US and China.
A huge chunk of those trillions come from European and other non-US sources. Capital controls (or triggering the EU anti-coercion legislation), a truly integrated EU capital market and a few failed USD treasury auctions could very rapidly re-direct those flows. If https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IIPUSNETIQ starts reversing, you'll see a lot of US & EU tech re-pricing (and not in the US's favour). Europe's tech tal…
>A huge chunk of those trillions come from European and other non-US sources.
Well that's even worse isn't it. Europe invents something only for the US to produce it and then sell it back to Europe?
Maybe it's time for Europeans to come home from their 30 year post cold war vacation. 60-70 hour work weeks, performance based job security, 15 days vacation (that you work during anyway), corporate tax exemptions funded by social program cuts, and 35 year old billionaires leading the charge. Droves of SWE's pulling €200k and the locals complaining about gentrification. There will be a vibrant tech scene and actually competitive software across the board within a few years.
But you probably recoiled in horror reading that. So do most other Europeans. So the strong players leave to reap the rewards that those things bring, and the rest stay behind the in the comfy status quo and say "We'll just buy xyz from the Americans".
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#403Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU is to blame for cookie banners on basically every website on the internet. I wish the US had something similar, and that there was more enforcement of disallowing "accept all" buttons without an equivalent "reject all" option. I also recognize that websites don't need the banner if they aren't trying to track me, but lets not pretend there aren't annoying consequences.
Companies could just reduce the amount of tracking data they're trying to harvest - then they wouldn't need a banner. If you're annoyed then be mad at the company - not the law trying to offer you some way to protect your data.
I don't care if the company does that
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#404Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU is to blame for cookie banners on basically every website on the internet. I wish the US had something similar, and that there was more enforcement of disallowing "accept all" buttons without an equivalent "reject all" option. I also recognize that websites don't need the banner if they aren't trying to track me, but lets not pretend there aren't annoying consequences.
If you want to be pedantic, the companies who track us across the internet with all of these third party tracking cookies on every website are the enemy here, not informed disclosure and consent.
I want to be pedantic. It's not the company making my browser store/serve cookies, the browser is doing that itself. If you really care, you can turn that off or wipe after session. And third-party cookies in particular are already globally disabled in Firefox and Safari because they're almost useless besides tracking, but Chrome still has them.
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#405Earlier quoted context omitted.
In California, where everything can give you cancer, do people consider that a failure of the companies putting the notices on everything, or a failure of government?
That's a failure of government because the law mandates the notice in so many places that it becomes pointless noise. Cookie banners are not analogous. It's easy to make a web site that doesn't need cookie banners. It's actually easier to make a site that doesn't need them than to make one that does. Adding in the tracking that requires banner takes effort. But companies prefer to put in that effort and annoy their u…
How easy is it really, seeing how nearly every website ends up having them? Even if they don't think it's needed, seems the legal risk isn't worth.
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#406It's not even just data stored on US servers. According to the CLOUD Act, any data stored by a US company, regardless of location, can be demanded by any authority in the US. No sovereign nation should use US companies for data storage or processing. Period. The attempts to shift to open source or non-US services are inevitably hobbled by US companies lobbying (read: bribing) politicians.
European countries aren’t known for strong privacy against the state. There are exceptions, but the EU’s “privacy rights” are almost exclusively against corporations. American privacy, by contrast, is almost exclusively focused on state surveillance. There are holes, the biggest being that foreigners on foreign soil have no privacy rights. Nor do the dead. But I’m not impressed with the “rights” Europeans have agains…
I think the US basically sees DMA, GDPR, etc as a tariff
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#407Earlier quoted context omitted.
I get why people find this hard to believe, because it is kind of a crazy rule, but I repeat once again that this does not matter. Even if you have never sold a single product to an EU resident, and never plan to do so, the EU says as my original comment detailed that you are subject to the GDPR the instant an EU resident provides you with personal data. (And of course, it's also the case that "selling to an EU resid…
I've read your links and you're misreading them. 1. GDPR applies to EU residents in the EU. The protection does not apply to EU residents going on trips to the US. 2. Based on the examples they've presented, there is a SUPER clean solution to your concerns. Geo-blocking. Problem solved, bye bye GDPR. But don't go crying for EU citizen money, can't have it both ways. Just read the examples they present, they're fairly…
I'm pretty sure this is right, except does geo-blocking legally release you from the liability of an EU citizen using a VPN?
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#408Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The EU is to blame for cookie banners on basically every website on the internet. This is the most low-rent complaint imaginable and it boggles my mind how I keep seeing it made straight-faced. One time I literally timed how long it took me to dismiss a EU cookie banner, it was about 350ms and only needs to be done once per site. All this outrage is over 350ms and I cannot take it seriously.
Also, why would you not want cookie banners? I prefer being able to choose to opt out of them, even if it's annoying
So every article on some site I try to read doesn't throw a full-page modal, sometimes with a delay. At least reader mode will sometimes ignore those banners.
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#409Misleading title by Reuters. The title should be "US orders diplomats to fight _EU_ data sovereignty initiatives". Why? Because the US is far too pussy to fight the other countries that have such initiatives - some of them reaching further than the EU's - knowing that unlike the EU those countries are definitely not going to take their shit. I can tell you that if the US says to Japan or Korea, just to name two such…
I don't think it's right to say "privacy/sovereignty". As gestured towards in the source article, Japan and Korea have joined the US's preferred data privacy forum https://www.globalcbpr.org/ . Data sovereignty is not a common idea outside the EU, and AFAIK even the current American government doesn't object to US citizens' data being stored in foreign servers under foreign jurisdiction.
Data sovereignty is almost the default in Korea and common in Japan. It has been a common idea there for decades, in fact there are laws about it. The big corps there were plenty familiar with the CLOUD Act and such many years ago when 99.9% of EU corps couldn't give less of a shit. Percentages are completely different.
Joining of a forum is meaningless in itself, the actual actions of the governments and businesses in their usage vs abstinence of US clouds is ehat matters.
Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives
#410Earlier quoted context omitted.
I don't think it's right to say "privacy/sovereignty". As gestured towards in the source article, Japan and Korea have joined the US's preferred data privacy forum https://www.globalcbpr.org/ . Data sovereignty is not a common idea outside the EU, and AFAIK even the current American government doesn't object to US citizens' data being stored in foreign servers under foreign jurisdiction.
Data sovereignty is almost the default in Korea and common in Japan. It has been a common idea there for decades, in fact there are laws about it. The big corps there were plenty familiar with the CLOUD Act and such many years ago when 99.9% of EU corps couldn't give less of a shit. Percentages are completely different. Joining of a forum is meaningless in itself, the actual actions of the governments and businesses…
Joining a forum is meaningless in itself, but it's a pointer towards broader differences in attitudes towards enforcement. Japan is a big country which multiple companies I've worked for do business with, yet I've never had to take a training course about what I, not living or working in Japan, must do to comply with Japanese data protection law.
(Should I have had to, and companies just don't bother because Japan is smaller? I guess I'd believe that, although I'd still be surprised that I've never heard about a Japanese data enforcement action against a foreign company.)