Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by kowdermeister 2953 days ago
> and isn't given an option to decline consent to Googles ToS

You can turn off the phone and sell it on Ebay

2 comments

Hobson's Choice regarding tracking / data collection consent is specifically a breach of GDPR.
The option to refuse the new terms is there, it's just not explicit. I'm not saying this is nice or good, but OP's comment sounded like there's no option, they just made it less obvious.
Less obvious and not explicit terms are violations of GDPR.
If you live in the USA. However, as an European you have more rights, and in the next years we will witness a lot of battles between EU users and American corporations desperately trying to maintain the old status quo.
So far Google and FB has no complaints about GDPR - that was the word from EU regulators. Why would you think they are so desperate?
I'm actually kinda curious what role the US government will end up playing in all of this
To downvoters: I'm curious to hear your counter-arguments. Yes, as a European I have more rights related to personal data than Americans. American companies can continue playing the same old tricks on American citizens with no consequences. It's not possible to do the same to Europeans anymore.
You were probably downvoted for your the absoluteness of your statement. For instance, you do not have more rights as a European business owner. Even as just a user, you have fewer rights to enter agreements now with these tech companies free from government involvement. What you may call rights, others call restrictions and limitations of rights.
Agreed. As an American, reading the term rights associated with increased government control is nonsensical. I understand the European viewpoint, its just much different in America
> As an American, reading the term rights associated with increased government control is nonsensical.

This is nonsensical. You can not have rights w/o government anyways. You may have privileges or power to force others to comply, but "rights" are defined by a third party entity that enforce them.

You have those backward. Natural rights, at least, are considered to exist before and outside of government. Enumerated rights may derive from government, as do privileges. The "lege" in privilege literally means "law".

Enumerated rights are the rights the GP was talking about. These are defined in law, though may derive from natural rights.

This is actually very interesting. It seems to me that many Americans really don't care how their personal data are (ab)used and will happily agree to absurd ToS-es without complaining. In Europe, we have quite different culture of doing things. And yes, the misnomed "right to be forgotten", i.e. the ability to remove my own personal data from a website, is an important right. Not being tracked is an important right. Not being profiled - ditto. It's really shocking to me that the narrative in the USA is that GDPR is evil, whereas many people in Europe consider it a very positive development, in spite of additional work that needs to be done.
Put simply: Americans prefer corporate overreach to government overreach. The latter is seen as only needed in extreme circumstances because there is often no going back. It's why you see hate for things like the cloud act and GDPR... it doesn't matter where they are enacted, some people don't want the government involved on these things at this point.
Americans for the most part hates being told what to do by the government. For me, I hate it because government intervention tends to cripple economic growth. I value economic growth > social welfare (used in the non derogatory way, in America "welfare" has an immediate negative connotation). I am also aware of this and can understand why other cultures would reverse that equation