[charles2013]

no, not necessarily.

consider guidance from new zealand's Health Information Governance Expert Advisory Group (HIGEAG) [0]:

> Unless an exemption is granted by the National Health IT Board, all personal health information held in an identifiable form and associated clinical or administrative data must be fully domiciled in New Zealand.

[0] http://healthitboard.health.govt.nz/standards/use-cloud-or-h...

[mirimir]

Yes. And imagine that it's "domiciled in New Zealand" by a US firm with mandated lawful access by the FBI ;)

[charles2013]

i get that this is a tongue-in-cheek comment, and appreciate your sense of humor, but it also saddens/frightens me to think this could become the prevailing sentiment in the years to come.

i grew up believing the internet was a great equalizer, capable of providing opportunity to people from across the globe, irrespective of nationality, race, creed, etc.

but now i fear the actions of certain nation states could produce -- for lack of a better term -- a fervent "digital xenophobia" that causes people to delineate and enforce boundaries on the net mirroring real world geopolitical borders maintained by a powerful minority.

that's not the kind of future i'd like to see.

for example, might people one day need a digital passport to send and receive data internationally? and might those data be subject to customs inspection before/after receipt?

today these may seem like parts of a cyberpunk b-movie plot, but it's not inconceivable that legislators would push for similar measures in the future if, for example, "national security interests" hung in the balance and they had the power to push such measures through.

[ucho]

> certain nation states could produce [...] "digital xenophobia"

Like banning people from "evil" countries from accessing websites: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7142381 ?

[mirimir]

This stuff saddens and frightens me too. And so my humor is often dark.