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

Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 506 posts

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#81

Post by thereisnospork »

oblio wrote: post #52
chrisseaton wrote: post #4

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Regulations exist to protect consumers and other companies from accusative behaviors. I think this is possibly a bit naive. Regulations also exist to protect powerful people's businesses, to push personal agendas, and to further political aims even if those are not actually in the interests of any consumers. Also sometimes people think they're making a regulation to protect consumers, but actually it makes things w…

It's not naive, that's why we have laws. Without laws, the people/groups you mention would just use the law of the jungle - might makes right - to get what they want. At least with laws they have to somewhat accommodate this process to get what they want, frequently compromising along the way. I'm not saying that all laws are perfect, but let's not get overwhelming cynicism get the best of us.

The point is regulations (and laws) are just tools - like a hammer they don't have inherent 'goodness'. A regulation can protect abusive business practices as easily as protect consumer rights.

Might doesn't make right but might writes. (regulations)

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#83

Post by hugi »

Sargos wrote: post #41
est31 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I wouldn't really call it balkanization. Most services still operate across borders. Thanks to the internet I have contact to peers from all over the world. Some aspects of the internet will become more localized in the future, but generally inter border communication is still growing I think. And in fact on an EU level, rules are unified instead of balkanized. The digital single market project brought things like th…

EU is still pretty balkanized when it comes to rules and is a headache for businesses especially when compared to the US.

The EU as a whole is much more consistent than individual countries, in fact, standardization is one of it's biggest strengths.

I used to work for the national vehicle registry in my country. European vehicles were easily registered using standard European "Whole Vehicle Type Approvals". Each new European car came with a type approval number linked to it's info, no problem.

American cars were a nightmare. Every new vehicle type came with it's own adventure of Googling or otherwise gathering information about the vehicle (number of doors, engine size etc...). Just no standards whatsoever. Horrible.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#84

Post by cle »

Sargos wrote: post #60
stickfigure wrote: post #11

This is the balkanization of the internet. We've lived through a brief period of free exchange among peoples, but it's soon over. I predict only one viable future for all technology companies, big and small: Pick a single national jurisdiction, keep your employees and servers inside it.

We seem to be nearing peak big tech which does conflict a bit with the nation state system but looking at technology today it does seem to be a temporary phenomenon with light at the end of the tunnel. Decentralized protocols that operate at the internet layer above the interference of nation states are being built and deployed today and while they are still in their infancy they have a clear path to providing a neut…

Could you elaborate on what those protocols are, how they help, what their weaknesses are, and what work remains? I'm really curious to learn more about this area. (Even just a link summarizing this would be awesome.)

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#85

Post by p_l »

vrperson wrote: post #68
dmitriid wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Personally, I think the GDPR cookie notifications have severely degraded the user experience of the web. The absolute vast majority of cookie banners are actually illegal under GDPR. One downside of GDPR isn't the banners, it's inaction by EU authorities which should've cracked down on these practices long ago. 1. Cookies essential for the functionality of your website (such as session cookies) don't need consent,…

What is meant by 4)? So users have the right to see a web site without ads? I think if users don't consent, you should be allowed to block their access to your web site?

They can see ads. You just can't process their PII for them.

You know, it used to be that ads were targeted by where they were shown, not by who was looking. That's a return to that model.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#86

Post by throwaway2245 »

munchbunny wrote: post #70
throwaway2245 wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I understand that GDPR is based on where the data [edit reflecting comments below:] originates. The law doesn't make reference to citizenship or residency. If you're physically in an EU country then EU GDPR applies to you there; if you're physically in the UK then UK GDPR applies to you there.

GDPR is generally based on where the data is located That is not correct. Specifically, the counterexample is if you are a EU citizen living in an EU country and the actual bits are stored in a datacenter in Texas. GDPR still applies in this case, as long as the website owner accepts EU users. If the website specifically doesn't do business in the EU, things are different.

Ah, apologies, you're right to pick that up, it's not quite what I meant. Maybe "where the data originates" is better?

Since the data originates where you are, the data has crossed a border to get to Texas and is therefore subject to GDPR (extra-territorially), I agree.

If you were in Texas when that data was collected from you, and you returned to the EU, I doubt that GDPR would apply to that data.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#87

Post by furyg3 »

robin_reala wrote: post #42
Hokusai wrote: post #3

Tech companies, or any company for that matter, will do what is best for themselves. Regulations exist to protect consumers and other companies from accusative behaviors. Remove the regulation and the 'we care for your privacy' message disappears with it. Because they never cared for your privacy, they will just doing what was mandatory.

It’s never “we care for your privacy” but rather “we value your privacy”, which is easy to read as “we assign a value to your privacy”. In that light, the messaging becomes clearer.

This. Companies cannot feel emotions.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#88

Post by alkonaut »

Hokusai wrote: post #3

Tech companies, or any company for that matter, will do what is best for themselves. Regulations exist to protect consumers and other companies from accusative behaviors. Remove the regulation and the 'we care for your privacy' message disappears with it. Because they never cared for your privacy, they will just doing what was mandatory.

What’s best for a company could include doing what’s right in the eyes of its customers.

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#89

Post by dcolkitt »

tstrimple wrote: post #75
dcolkitt wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This just isn’t consistent with the empirical evidence whatsoever. An overwhelming amount of economic analysis shows that the burden of regulation disproportionately falls on small business. That doesn’t necessarily mean that there aren’t other justifications for any given regulation. But ain’t no small business owner or entrepreneur in history ever said “Boy! All these regulations sure are making my life easy”

Yeah, we never see examples of small teams disrupting large markets with entrenched competitors. I'm afraid with taxi medallion regulations, we'll never see any competition in that space.

I don't understand the point you're making. Are you arguing that tax medallion regulations helped ride share companies enter the market?

Re: Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

#90

Post by hugi »

Sargos wrote: post #60
stickfigure wrote: post #11

This is the balkanization of the internet. We've lived through a brief period of free exchange among peoples, but it's soon over. I predict only one viable future for all technology companies, big and small: Pick a single national jurisdiction, keep your employees and servers inside it.

We seem to be nearing peak big tech which does conflict a bit with the nation state system but looking at technology today it does seem to be a temporary phenomenon with light at the end of the tunnel. Decentralized protocols that operate at the internet layer above the interference of nation states are being built and deployed today and while they are still in their infancy they have a clear path to providing a neut…

What utter nonsense. Facebook and Twitter will not turn themselves into protocols unless explicitly forced to do so by authorities. It's in their interest to be monopolies.
Post reply on HN