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

US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

451–460 of 509 posts

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#451

Post by inigyou »

tick_tock_tick wrote: post #320
soco wrote: post #155

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And here we are again, spreading lies right? Robert Habeck was NOT arrested, he and his friends were investigated in the broader case of neo-nazi propaganda which they were spreading as well. Unless you consider neo-nazi freedom of speech, of course. The Pinocchio case meant exactly one official letter sent to that guy, lol "arrests". The investigation was dropped and everybody criticized the investigation. Ricarda L…

> Unless you consider neo-nazi freedom of speech I mean that's why it's called free speech. Probably the most famous case the ACLU (American Civil Liberties Union) fought for was to make sure Nazi's could hold a rally and march through Skokie, Illinois, USA an area famous for being predominantly Jewish.

I think the population of Europe widely believes that Nazism should be an exception to free speech. This makes American Nazis very angry.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#452

Post by inigyou »

johnsimer wrote: post #413
soco wrote: post #351

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Even here on HN insulting other posters gets you banned. Same in many US media. There's quite a discrepancy between what people claim and the reality on the field, why you think? Yes I'm aware I'm shifting focus from Europe to the US, but you know, who should cast the first stone...

Private companies should have the freedom to ban/censor whatever content on their platforms they want. I’d prefer if they don’t, but we shouldn’t force governments to prevent companies from creating their own rules about how people can use their own software Governments however should not interfere with citizen’s freedom of speech - there should be no fines/arrests for insulting politicians. Otherwise those governmen…

Allowing private companies to do anything they want, when there are only a few large private companies, makes them a shadow state. Europe is much more willing to restrict companies from becoming shadow states. If they make a law that says bank transfers must be used for large payments (or if that becomes de facto true) they also make a law that says banks must give accounts to everyone.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#453

Post by inigyou »

CGamesPlay wrote: post #386
fatal94 wrote: post #367

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No amount of legislation can stop subpoenas, wiretapping and other extrajudicial means the US has used for data surveillance since the inception of the Patriot Act. With data privacy increasingly becoming a critical matter of national security, strengthening data sovereignty laws and holding corporations accountable was always the way forward.

This is untrue. Subpoenas, wiretapping, and other extrajudicial means can be stopped by legislation that bans them. You can't say in one breath that legislation that enables it (Patriot Act) cannot be undone by more legislation. There are many hurdles required to produce the required legislation, which may not even be broadly supported by the public, but it isn't correct to say "no amount of legislation can stop exis…

If they could be stopped by legislation that bans them, they would have been stopped by the legislation that banned them prior to the legislation that authorised them, but we know this is not the case. They were being done on a wide scale long before they were legal.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#454

Post by inigyou »

philipallstar wrote: post #223
hgomersall wrote: post #175

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quantity theory of money is trivially shown to be nonsense just by considering what happens to savings (i.e. nothing). You need to up your analysis if you want to truly understand.

What happened to savings in Zimbabwe when they printed trillions of dollars? Did that do anything to what those savings would buy?

It is possible that curves are not linear. That is, it is possible that doing 1 of a thing is good, while doing 1000000 of a thing is bad. Your argument is the same as "you say you need water to survive? But what happens if you're trapped in a giant fish tank with no air pocket?" It is not a good argument.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#455

Post by inigyou »

nxm wrote: post #340
gtowey wrote: post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Such a missed opportunity. We could have been to data privacy and protection what Switzerland is to Banking. But no, our cooperate oligarch overlords just can't keep their hands out of the piggy bank.

Swiss? Where money laundering is basically a given?

The flip side of privacy is privacy, yes.

I don't think it's still the money laundering haven, though. The US forced them into some pretty strict KYC laws to avoid being globally debanked.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#456

Post by inigyou »

alephnerd wrote: post #37
Tyrubias wrote: post #12

I can’t imagine how any country would think the US is trustworthy enough to be the place where everyone stores their data. If companies cannot comply with data sovereignty laws then they shouldn’t exist at all. Personally, even as a US citizen, I’m hoping tech companies in Europe and Asia become independent enough to no longer be beholden to US interests. It’s clear that the era where any one country has global hegem…

> I’m hoping tech companies in Europe and Asia become independent enough to no longer be beholden to US interests What tech companies? At the end of the day, it's all about capital and IP. American domiciled VCs and companies can outinvest just about any other competitor, and much of the core IP for vast swathes of critical next-gen technologies (high NA EUV, Foundation Models, Quantum Computing) is in the US, but Am…

Capital may be important, but in the end, what matters is to actually do the work. Stuff is created by labor, and capital just directs it where to go. In the past that would mean all the relevant labor travelled from Europe to Silicon Valley or NYC, but it doesn't mean that when they're not travelling because they would be randomly arrested at the border. So there is now a lot more tech labor in Europe and that means Europe will build more tech. It worked for China.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#457

Post by ben_w »

ta9000 wrote: post #416
roger110 wrote: post #406

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think the US basically sees DMA, GDPR, etc as a tariff

It’s definitely made browsing the open web a worse experience. There should be global opt in/out.

There was, the ad agencies either ignored it, or worse used it as an additional signal.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#458

Post by inigyou »

roger110 wrote: post #407
oblio wrote: post #375

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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?

When you talk about liability, where is that relative to? Liability means that a court will order you to pay money. Which court are you worried about? US courts won't order you to pay anything, and European courts can't take away your money if your money's in the US. Businesses break laws in other countries all the time, and nothing happens to them. Remember when Russia charged Google with a quadrillion dollar fine and nothing happened?

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#459

Post by ben_w »

TacticalCoder wrote: post #396
pyuser583 wrote: post #382

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

[flagged]

> And it's obvious that either taxation of confiscation is the end goal.

And? Money is, and has always been, the government's stuff, the rest of us use it because it is helpful stuff, it is helpful stuff only to the extent that some government maintains it (and when they don't maintain it correctly it stops being useful, see all examples of hyperinflation). There's a reason the Bible says "Render unto Caesar what is Caesar's".

I've seen a flat that was funded by the sale of an inherited stamp collection which was valued at £1 by the tax people. When I saw the tax statement, I thought someone must have made a mistake, then the rules were explained to me and I thought it was madness.

Re: US orders diplomats to fight data sovereignty initiatives

#460

Post by ben_w »

beachy wrote: post #393
victorbjorklund wrote: post #366

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rest of NATO has more soldiers than US. Would US win? Maybe. But how many millions dead Americans? US lost in Afghanistan and there they just fought terrorists.

The US (like any country) struggles in asymmetrical/guerilla warfare. It always devolves to the famous statement by a US officer during the Vietnam war that “We had to destroy Ben Tre in order to save it.” If the gloves were off then the equation would be different. A fight with the rest of NATO would be conventional warfare where the US has a giant advantage.

> A fight with the rest of NATO would be conventional warfare where the US has a giant advantage.

Given NATO contains three nuclear powers, a full on fight between the US and the rest of NATO would be an "everyone loses" scenario. Even if the US did a first-strike that somehow eliminated all the French and British nuclear submarines, simply losing the EU as customers and suppliers would likely double US unemployment and push inflation to 10%/year for the next decade (hard to be sure though, see Covid influence on supply chains).

Actually getting hit back by retaliatory strikes by either France or the UK independently would be in the order of multiples of US annual GDP in physical damage. France has enough that even if 80% of their missiles were stopped, they'd still be able to hit every US state capital (though why would anyone care to attack Alaska or Hawaii if they're nuking all the rest?)

As per estimate from 2005, even just a single 100 kT nuke in the right place would have an impact equivalent to the US GDP at the time:

  The results of our analysis are shown in Figure 4. As anticipated, the economic consequences are highest for the largest nuclear weapon yield and the most conservative cleanup level. New York City nets the highest economic damage across the cleanup spectrum, because of its dense population and high value real estate. Note that the economic consequences for New York City across almost every cleanup level meet or exceed $10 trillion, which is roughly equivalent to the annual Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of the U.S. economy.
- Economic consequences of a rad/nuc attack: cleanup standards significantly affect cost, page 9, https://www.nrc.gov/docs/ML1135/ML11355A226.pdf
Post reply on HN