Lobbyists rewrote Washington state’s privacy law

Post by andrekandre » Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 2:45 AM UTC

rayiner wrote: post #15

deogeo wrote: post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That’s a perverted view of the “public interest” as being diametrically opposed to corporate interests. The goal of corporations is to extract as much money as possible from the public. So in a very real sense, they are opponents, even if sometimes their interests align.

Corporations give people goods and services in exchange. (And almost everyone gets the money in the first place by working for a corporation.) Their interests are highly aligned.

Post by mikeash » Sun, Apr 28, 2019, 9:16 PM UTC

tzs wrote: post #43

mikeash wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mocrosoft’s views on legislation are already throughly represented through the voting power of its shareholders, employees, and anyone else who is affected by them. Are you saying they should have unequal influence beyond that?

Huh? As a subscriber to Office 365, Microsoft has sensitive information about me, and so I am affected by Microsoft's handling of privacy and data security. How does that make my voting power representative of their views? I also question whether a company's views are represented through the voting power of its employees.