Live data from Hacker News

UK to depart from GDPR

lawgazette.co.uk

601–610 of 659 posts

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#601

I honestly get giggles from how unprepared they are culturally for what becoming America-like will do to them. Does anyone else? American-like but with no negotiating leverage and having burned all the bridges to the other economic unions.

GDPR only came in two or so years ago, it’s hardly out of living memory that we had standards more like the US

The GDPR wasn't written from scratch, we previously had the Data Protection Act which offered many of the same rights as the GDPR like the protection of personal information and prevention of disclosure to third parties, the right to access data a company holds on you (both of which date back to 1984), the right to opt-out of direct marketing, the right to removal of data that may cause distress, etc, which while a little dated is still far ahead of what most of the US has today.

The trouble with the DPA was fines capped out at £500k and international enforcement was limited so large international companies like Google and Facebook could treat the law as an optional slap on the wrist while smaller international businesses effectively flew under the radar, the GDPR largely rectified both of these issues while modernising the laws in response to issues that generally didn't exist prior to the mid 2000s.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#602
post #148

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In the spirit of keeping these comments high quality I'd love engage with you about this. Why do you think that? I'm actually a dual citizen of the UK and Australia and I have to say my experience is that neither country is anything like the US. (Beware when assuming you know who you're talking to on the internet ;) )

I grew up in the city in Australia. Once when I crossed the road (as a pedestrian) at a red light, a police officer on the other side of the street stopped me and gave me a warning for jaywalking. Before I had walked, I had looked both ways and deemed it safe; there was no traffic and no other pedestrians waiting. (In my mind: I am just a person on planet Earth, trying to get from position A to position B, less than…

Jaywalking is an odd example since I've lived in Sydney for 20 years and don't know anyone busted for it. I've seen many people cross at lights like this even with police cars sitting and waiting in traffic in clear sight.

I think what happens is they just get told one day to target it, when they'll stand around and catch people, otherwise they just don't care unless they take a personal dislike to you. I have heard of times they'll descend on Sydney CBD intersections like this in mobs to send a message. The rest of the time, jaywalking is generally very casually done here and not really a big deal like in some US movies.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#603
post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On the balance, Singapore is much more free in the economical sphere than the UK, so if the UK did copy ALL of its policies, it would become more much economically competitive and see more rapid economic development. As for exploitation of workers, Singapore has seen massively more wage growth than the UK over the last 50 years, so I don't equate a free labor market with exploitation. I will add that there are import…

>On the balance, Singapore is much more free in the economical sphere than the UK Singapore is massively more favorable to investors and this gets charactized as "free". Forced savings accounts with strict rules about how you can use the money are pretty much the antithesis of economic freedom, for instance, but it won't show up in economic freedom indices. The Economist is squarely aimed at foreign investors with mo…

>>Forced savings accounts with strict rules about how you can use the money are pretty much the antithesis of economic freedom, for instance, but it won't show up in economic freedom indices.

Forced savings are less of an affront to economic liberty than redistributive taxes. With Singapore's MediSave accounts, you are also free to start spending some of the funds on a wider range of goods/services once you have built an adequate amount of savings. This is not pure libertarianism, by any stretch of the imagination, but it is less of an expropriation of private property than taxes that create an uncapped obligation for you to support people you have no relationship to beyond being co-nationals.

The most important thing about Singapore is that it doesn't have a welfare culture. Situations you see in the West, like a person suffering from drug addiction all their life, and spending a lifetime being arrested for stealing from other residents, and quickly released each time due to a left-wing pity culture, while they receive disability and welfare cheques each month, that other citizens - the same ones losing their precious property to the lifelong addict - are forced to pay for, and that are promptly converted to drug money via their local dealer and node in the organized crime controlled drug trafficking network, are unheard of in Singapore, because there is no large Welfare Culture like there is in the UK and other Western countries.

>>Would you like to endorse the lack of exploitation of Russian citizens or retract your statement?

Fair point. Much of the wage growth in Singapore can be attributed to the catch up effect. But even after becoming an advanced economy, it has seen more rapid wage growth than the UK, and that is not attributable to the catch-up effect. That is because economic liberty is in the long-term interest of workers, because it raises overall productivity and average wages.

>>Ironically it's been the deliberately anti free market stuff they've done which has boosted living standards the most.

Western countries have massive intervention in their housing markets too. At least Singapore's is about expanding supply and making it available to the general market, as opposed to creating poverty-concentrations/ghettos by targetting socialized housing to those with low reportable income.

Ironically, Singapore's government, by building towers across the city, did away with one of the major impediments to housing markets in the West - zoning restrictions on building density/height.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#605
post #493
post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

For a start the people who actually rule - the MPs in parliament - are predominantly remainers. When it comes to business leaders, they're as divided as everyone else. A lot of businesses do extensive trade with the EU and stand to lose. The finance industry particularly risks losing a lot of business, although there are some sectors of it that might gain it's mostly through trading on short term volatility. They'll…

> the people who actually rule - the MPs in parliament - are predominantly remainers This is false, because every time it was presented for a vote Leave won. If the majority were Remain, Brexit would necessarily not have happened. As for the alleged ordinary voters, what did they want out of it and what are they actually getting out of it?

There's a big difference between having voted to remain vs want to overturn the result of the referendum. Luckily most of those who actually were in the latter camp were kicked out by their electorates in 2019.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#606

Earlier quoted context omitted.

elitist nonsense. They ought to be annoying. so sites that do not track you for advertising can just add your cookie when you actively sign in, without the annoying popup on first visit, and receive more traffic because they are less-annoying.

Get real, most sites aren't going to do that when they can get away with putting a modal/banner up. It's the end-user that gets the brunt. Most of the modals are full of dark patterns that basically force you to accept the cookies etc. unless you go through multiple different screens and checkboxes.

> It's the end-user that gets the brunt.

as they should.

At least it is in their face now and can entice curiosity.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#607
post #549
post #539

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is that a sarcastic comment? Because GDPR allows for liquidating fines, even for Google. I believe it has a cap of 2% annual global turnover, per infraction, or something similar. Problem is, GDPR is not enforced. I haven't heard of small companies being investigated, let alone having any fines imposed, even when blatantly violating GDPR.

Just because you haven't heard of it doesn't mean it doesn't happen.. https://gdpr-fines.inplp.com/list/ https://www.enforcementtracker.com/

A few hundred fines in a union of a half a billion people.Right. I'm based in the UK and from my own professional experience dealing with GDPR and ICO,all I can say that companies can and do play pretty wild with data because the reprecussions are simply not there. Nobody is busting your door with fines unless you do outright absurd things+ backlog of cases is so long that by the time someone will start looking into it, you may not even be in the business anymore.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#608

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of these companies wouldn't know how to make much use of the data anyway. My experience working with companies and analytics (even did an analytics startup some years back) is that they haven't a clue about how to actually use it and just heard that more data is somehow better. That to me sounds like they're most likely to sell the data, since they don't know how to use it themselves. Better these companies have…

Companies still need some basic data for whatever problem they're solving, right? As an example, let's say I want to launch a blogging platform. You need some basic tables (data) like User, Posts, Tags, etc. I'd consider this data the business needs for core business. Does there need to be some GDPR compliance thing? Anecdotally a dumb app I built I was worried about EU visitors and just wanted to block them instead…

But why were you afraid? I see some US based sites refusing EU visitors due to GDPR,but unless you sell their data down the road, there's not much to be afraid of.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#609
post #597

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Developers have to have mechanisms in place to delete gdpr data when required and not store data that's not required for you goals Purely anecdote, but zero companies I know in Germany, Italy or France are doing this. (The ones in Switzerland are.) There is a cosmetic fix that produces an email so there is something to show a regulator if they come knocking. The logic being investing anything more than that is a cr…

Also pure anecdotal, I have had GDPR interactions with EPIC Games (asked them to delete my account) and Blizzard Entertainment (asked them to retrieve my data). Both went well. The interaction with EPIC was manual, I had to send an email and got back what it looked like a personalized e-mail. Account seemed to be deleted. With Blizzard it went a bit different. They do have online automated tool to download your own d…

Why did it fail,may I ask? Epic and Blizzard are US based but do significant business in the EU, so lots of stuff would apply to them.

Re: UK to depart from GDPR

#610

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Get real, most sites aren't going to do that when they can get away with putting a modal/banner up. It's the end-user that gets the brunt. Most of the modals are full of dark patterns that basically force you to accept the cookies etc. unless you go through multiple different screens and checkboxes.

> It's the end-user that gets the brunt. as they should. At least it is in their face now and can entice curiosity.

Let's be honest, the average user (even myself) will just click 'okay'. It doesn't help anyone and just causes annoyances for most users. If there was proper legislation to block the tracking full-stop then maybe it'd make a difference but in the end it's just a half-measure that causes frustration for both parties. The users that have to dismiss the prompts and websites that have to implement them.
Post reply on HN