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

Back to EU

adambird.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 110 posts

Re: Back to EU

#61

Post by secondcoming »

nickd2001 wrote: post #39
nanna wrote: post #26

Honestly what we need in the UK is a Back to the EU campaign that formulates a long term strategy for returning. In two decades England's Baby Boomer generation will no longer hold the reigns of power in the country (please God) and those in charge will have come from a generation that overwhelmingly voted Remain.

Why would the EU ever want us back? Really? By the time England's population becomes strongly in favour of rejoining, our economy will have been fairly trashed, we won't be a significant player, the EU will have done just fine without us for ages, why would they ever let a former member that caused a bunch of trouble, back in? What's in it for them? Also I'm not convinced England's population ever will be in strong f…

$$$ and fish.

Re: Back to EU

#62

Post by Thiez »

funshed wrote: post #51

The UK has launched a consolution on how to improve Data Protection Laws. One campaign on this consultation is to abolish the stupid Cookie Consent requirement, that is evidenced again and again to be wholley pointless. Anouther campaign with this consultation is to enable medical researches to use anonomised NHS data. The National Health Service (NHS) is huge and useing that data could usher in some great medical ad…

> the stupid Cookie Consent requirement, that is evidenced again and again to be wholley pointless

Is it? It caused some companies such as GitHub to get rid of third party cookies entirely, and they don't need to ask for consent for the cookies that they do use. If only the law were enforced more, and I imagine in a few more years many more companies would be compliant.

Re: Back to EU

#63

Post by bellyfullofbac »

archsurface wrote: post #35
bambax wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From TFA: > Whatever we say to our customers about how Cronofy approaches data privacy and controls, corresponding enforcement will not follow. (...) We can make our protestations about ISO certifications, data management controls, segmented data hosting. However, prospective customers won’t necessarily get that far because we’ll be discounted based on our location. I don’t blame them. Data protection is fraught and…

I work at a global identity company in the UK - we don't have such problems. I'm afraid this blog post is nothing but grandstanding.

For how long now? Could it be that many EU potential customers haven't even talked to your company since 2016, and the people who are still talking to you are the ones who aren't worried about exporting their data outside of the EU?

Re: Back to EU

#64

Post by yarcob »

Zenst wrote: post #38

"What the UK government is proposing is going to put us on the same footing as US companies when it comes to dealing with EU customers, ie under the auspice of a regime that can’t be trusted." Not sure you want to alienate the US just to score some political points when by you own admission - the bulk of your business is with the US ( a country that has a larger patriotic base than the UK and more experience of how t…

> any US company can implement a more stringent data policy beyond the scope of legal remit within the country of operations

Theoretically, yes, you are right. But some companies are just going to say, oh, you are based in the US, let's look for a different vendor.

It's not even necessarily about the GDPR. For example, US companies tend to send really shitty invoices. There's barely any info on the invoice, some don't even include the full legal name and address of the invoicer. That really sucks when the tax authorities audit you and want proof for where all your money went.

If I buy services from the EU, I can assume that they comply with the GDPR, and I know that I'll get a proper invoice with VAT, and I won't have trouble with the tax authorities.

Re: Back to EU

#65

Post by hagbard_c »

dkdbejwi383 wrote: post #13
imdsm wrote: post #4

Quoted post unavailable.

> Is no where free of it? No, everything in life is political in some way or another.

To be more precise, everything in society is political in some way or another. If you want to get rid of politics, get rid of society [1]. The denser the population, the heavier the politics so it already helps to move out to less densely populated areas. This comes as no surprise given the origin of the term politics - πόλις (polis) being the Greek word for "city" and πολίτης (polites) the word for "citizen".

The same goes for the 'net where the most populous (not so much popular) entities wield an overly large amount of political power. If you want to get rid of those politics you'll have to move out of those environments - in other words, decentralise the 'net.

Source: a classical education as well as personal experience in moving from a densely populated country to one with more breathing space.

[1] by moving elsewhere

Re: Back to EU

#66

Post by Zenst »

M2Ys4U wrote: post #57
funshed wrote: post #51

The UK has launched a consolution on how to improve Data Protection Laws. One campaign on this consultation is to abolish the stupid Cookie Consent requirement, that is evidenced again and again to be wholley pointless. Anouther campaign with this consultation is to enable medical researches to use anonomised NHS data. The National Health Service (NHS) is huge and useing that data could usher in some great medical ad…

>There is no plans to weaken GDPR You and I have read a very different consultation document, then. The UK government absolutely are planning to weaken the UK GDPR.

The prospect of people protesting to save cookies and slogans upon buses saying we could save the NHS millions of clicks a year by scrapping them - has my comedy pen running away with itself.

Re: Back to EU

#67

Post by lixtra »

funshed wrote: post #51

The UK has launched a consolution on how to improve Data Protection Laws. One campaign on this consultation is to abolish the stupid Cookie Consent requirement, that is evidenced again and again to be wholley pointless. Anouther campaign with this consultation is to enable medical researches to use anonomised NHS data. The National Health Service (NHS) is huge and useing that data could usher in some great medical ad…

> Even if there was Adam Bird's company is welcome to go above and beyond the requirement.

It’s a brand issue. Being EU based signals that you have to obey GDPR by law, not only contract. Just like being a Swiss bank was a brand advantage long time ago.

Of course, for their EU customers any company has to comply with GDPR by law.

Re: Back to EU

#68

Post by rzanella »

nivenkos wrote: post #49
dijit wrote: post #5

Interestingly the Dutch have been very keen to capture Tech companies (or at least make it an attractive place for employees). There is a low flat tax rate (30% iirc) for some years (was 5 when I last checked) if you're working in an "in-demand" sector, and tech is one of those sectors. This is somewhat controversial from what I understand, not all of the Dutch like it, and I understand why: it's not really very fair…

Worth noting that a lot of other EU countries have similar policies. Spain has the Beckham law - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beckham_law - though it might not survive much longer. Sweden has a similar policy but you need to earn over ~120,000 euros: https://www.forskarskattenamnden.se/forutsattningarforskatte... I was really close to moving to NL to take advantage of that (vs. the insane taxes in Sweden) but unfort…

Portugal - https://www.pwc.pt/pt/servicos/fiscalidade/individuals-taxat...

Re: Back to EU

#69

Post by nanna »

refurb wrote: post #44
nanna wrote: post #26

Honestly what we need in the UK is a Back to the EU campaign that formulates a long term strategy for returning. In two decades England's Baby Boomer generation will no longer hold the reigns of power in the country (please God) and those in charge will have come from a generation that overwhelmingly voted Remain.

Not sure why you’d assume that those who voted “remain” don’t change their thinking by then. As other have mentioned the status quo is now something entirely different and “remain” won’t mean much in a decade.

> Not sure why you’d assume that those who voted “remain” don’t change their thinking by then.

Didn't assume that. All I said was that 'those in charge will have come from a generation that overwhelmingly voted Remain', which will be true regardless. The kind of strategic thinking needed would be how to maintain their sentiments towards the EU.

It's also of note that this generation is overwhelmingly progressive in their politics, is being denied radical action on climate change, denied the ability to buy a house, laden with university debt, and so on. The conditions are ripe for a generation who wants radical social change, and maybe rejoining the EU will be part of that.

Re: Back to EU

#70

Post by gpvos »

sorokod wrote: post #37
WJW wrote: post #27

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My favorite is the word "angstschreeuw" (cry/shout of fear), which is the word with the most consecutive consonants in the Dutch dictionary.

Angst scream?

Etymologically, yes. The meaning has diverged a little, so "cry of fear" is a closer translation.
Post reply on HN