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

GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

bbc.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

531–540 of 680 posts

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#531

Post by dominotw »

gcthomas wrote: post #188
dominotw wrote: post #158

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I attribute it to European jealously over american tech success. Hi tech success that flies in the face of their supposed social, cultural and moral superiority. User tracking is not really why we don't have nice things, look at the success of moviepass even after they publicly admitted what they were tracking. People want part of the spoils which is exactly the purpose of GDPR.

Isn't Moviepass hæmmoraging $20 million a day while its share price tanks? No, if you knew how Europeans think, you'd realise that this is really just about securing privacy. Most of the regulators are really focussed on ensuring compliance, not levying fines.

> Isn't Moviepass hæmmoraging $20 million a day while its share price tanks?

Correct me if I am wrong. But that just proves my point rather than yours, correct?

They are losing so much from ppl using not because ppl are quitting it due to privacy concerns.

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#532

Post by class4behavior »

sireat wrote: post #102
flohofwoe wrote: post #48

Alternatively there's this: https://eu.usatoday.com/ No ads, no tracking, no cookies, not even Javascript. Just plain HTML+CSS and JPEG images. The whole front page is around 650 KByte, and by far most of this is in the image files. As a result the page looks very clean and loads very fast. This is what all news web sites should look like, not just for EU readers (although I fear that this is just a temporary solutio…

That looks fantastic, I would actually read USA Today if this lean site sticks around. If they want to monetize, publishers should control their own generic ad inventory (like they used to in old pre internet days) and ask for opt-in if you want customization. Easy on paper but hard in reality.

Apparently, WashPo prefers a more coercive method: https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/

Either pay or sell yourself.

A gamble they might lose if people just stop sharing and click Washpo articles, but a possible route if others follow suit.

Meanwhile, NPR goes more hardcore than even USA Today: https://text.npr.org

I wonder, does that mean EU users are just a nuisance costing traffic, or that all graphics are tracking visitors?

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#533

Post by Sargos »

mrfusion wrote: post #93

Is blocking a legal way to comply with gdpr? Surely you can’t identify all Eu-ians? Does the law just care that you made an effort to block them?

Yes. Intent matters. The website is showing that they do not want EU visitors as they don't want to deal with the high cost of GDPR. If an EU visitor manages to bypass this restriction in some way like a VPN then they lose their EU protection as they are hiding their identity as a EU citizen.

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#534

Post by taysic »

methodover wrote: post #489
ams6110 wrote: post #364

Facebook, Google, Instagram and WhatsApp are accused of forcing users to consent to targeted advertising to use the services. Privacy group noyb.eu, led by activist Max Schrems, said people were not being given a "free choice". I mean, that just isn't a valid complaint IMO. You have a choice -- you can not use Facebook, or not use Google, or not use Instagram, or not use WhatsApp. If you're using a "free" service tha…

They don't, and this argument by Max Schrems is ridiculous. There is no provision in the GDPR that says if you fund your site with ads, you now have to provide an ad-free version.

Not an ad-free version but you have to provide one without personalized ads being used. Non-personalized ads make far less money than personalized.

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#535

Post by toyg »

_jal wrote: post #278
rdlecler1 wrote: post #182

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I call BS on this. You’re going to read a publication because of the relevance and quality of the content. USA Today Europe will no longer have metrics to sell advertising which may then force them to dial back on their writers salaries.

This is, I think, a great illustration of the problems with a lot of economic reasoning. Sure, maybe that's exactly what would happen, but changing one variable in a toy model is not proof that it will. There are successful news sites that do just fine without becoming relentless clickbait optimization mills - and in fact, those are exactly the sites I tend to read. Two examples, so we're talking about something spec…

> it trains people into a way of thinking that blinds them to options.

It's also a dilemma of sorts. If you stop running ads, then there is one less outlet for them, which means rates for all the other outlets are likely to grow. If enough people do it, the few players left will make very good business. Would you rather move out, risking your livelihood on experimental business models, or stay in with the devil you know, ensuring nobody is going to do better than you?

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#536

Post by fixermark »

toyg wrote: post #523
fixermark wrote: post #449

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course, that vision of what the internet could be never really answered the question of where the money was coming from to pay for the servers that are delivering that content.

Look at it: that's an RSS feed, basically. They could have had paywalled feeds with a standard payment system that people could write clients and aggregators for. No ads, just subscriptions. The irony is that we'll get there, eventually: Apple and Google are slowly agreeing a payment system and then they will push it into the browser, and everyone will use it.

If the payment system allows for microtransactions (and, ideally, allows for ads or alternative payment methods for people who don't have the cash to be micro'd), we get a worldwide web somewhat shaped like the one we have today. That seems similar to what Google is pursuing with Contributor (https://contributor.google.com/v/marketing).

If we just do big-dollar monthly or daily subscription paywalls, we end up with a Balkanized web where I can't read the article you're reading unless I pay for it. That'll significantly change the way interactions happen on the worldwide web.

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#537

Post by [deleted] »

eyeinthepyramid wrote: post #524
eyeinthepyramid wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There are benefits to washing the eggs, isn't there? I have read that in Europe as a consumer it's a lot more important to wash the eggs before using them.

Actually I found this post about it: https://cooking.stackexchange.com/questions/66957/is-salmone... Apparently there is some evidence that egg-related salmonella is 7x more prevalent in Europe vs the US.

[deleted]

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#538

Post by kobrad »

flohofwoe wrote: post #48

Alternatively there's this: https://eu.usatoday.com/ No ads, no tracking, no cookies, not even Javascript. Just plain HTML+CSS and JPEG images. The whole front page is around 650 KByte, and by far most of this is in the image files. As a result the page looks very clean and loads very fast. This is what all news web sites should look like, not just for EU readers (although I fear that this is just a temporary solutio…

I forgot that websites can load this fast, this is incredible. Not on mobile though

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#539

Post by methodover »

taysic wrote: post #534
methodover wrote: post #489

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They don't, and this argument by Max Schrems is ridiculous. There is no provision in the GDPR that says if you fund your site with ads, you now have to provide an ad-free version.

Not an ad-free version but you have to provide one without personalized ads being used. Non-personalized ads make far less money than personalized.

I see no reading of the GDPR that would lead you to that conclusion...

The GDPR requires many things, but there's nothing in there that says you can't reject the customer if they don't opt-in to the things you want them to opt-in to.

Do you have a citation from the GDPR that leads you to believe that I am wrong on that point?

Re: GDPR: US news sites unavailable to EU users over data protection rules

#540

Post by Spooky23 »

chrshawkes wrote: post #508
rock_hard wrote: post #500

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or how to pay the people who create the content

It seems many people think content worth enjoying is somehow created and delivered freely.

It always was.

In the 90s, the N.Y. Times was $1 in my city and the local paper was $0.30. That covered paper, distribution and ink.

The ads paid for it, and I think the ads were more effective. IMO online ads are mostly fraud and bullshit.

Post reply on HN