I think it's the first law that companies will take seriously as it has % penalty instead of traditional "part of doing business" fine.
this post was submitted on 09 Sep 2023
47 points (98.0% liked)
Privacy
32484 readers
247 users here now
A place to discuss privacy and freedom in the digital world.
Privacy has become a very important issue in modern society, with companies and governments constantly abusing their power, more and more people are waking up to the importance of digital privacy.
In this community everyone is welcome to post links and discuss topics related to privacy.
Some Rules
- Posting a link to a website containing tracking isn't great, if contents of the website are behind a paywall maybe copy them into the post
- Don't promote proprietary software
- Try to keep things on topic
- If you have a question, please try searching for previous discussions, maybe it has already been answered
- Reposts are fine, but should have at least a couple of weeks in between so that the post can reach a new audience
- Be nice :)
Related communities
much thanks to @gary_host_laptop for the logo design :)
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
GDPR has that, too
But GDPR had severe loopholes. Like not forcing a reject all cookie button
It does force it, if I’m not mistaken. Rejecting all should be as easy as accepting all. The problem is with enforcement.
Google got severely fined for not making the reject all button as easy to click as the accept button. Now YouTube has the reject button 1-click in Europe
[This comment has been deleted by an automated system]
I don't understand where and how I need to file complaints. I live in France and Belgium, and have encountered several large and popular websites which enforce a "cookie wall". This does not appear to respect the cookie law.
@Kidplayer_666 it does? specifically says withdrawal of consent must be as easy as giving it. just not properly enforced.
GDPR has either up to € or %.
The fines in the DSA are enormous: up to 6% of WORLDWIDE turnover.
I can only hope a similar law passes elsewhere or devices that comply with them are easily importable.
There's some good stuff in there and it's easy to cheer for some big new regulatory burdens being put on Google and Facebook, but it's slightly chilling to think what it'd be like if they eventually try to apply it to the fediverse. It sets up teams of what it calls "trusted flaggers" for example, whose job it will be to scour the net for anything they believe to be "illegal content" and order it removed. I imagine they'd start with places like c/piracy, but once such a vast apparatus for net censorship is set up who knows where else it might start looking. They'll use it to go after sellers of "counterfeit" goods as well. Imagine your instance admins being forced to go through some kind of appeals process to take down posts they don't like, but being required to instantly take down posts the government doesn't like.
I don't know, it's pretty complicated but there are some reasons to be slightly worried about it I guess.
I'm really looking forward to seeing it actually applied. I hope it uses Matrix for interop as I understand it would make bridges an official "feature" rather than a TOS-breaking unreliable hack. I hope it gets applied to Discord as well, since my university requires me to be in their guild so I've had to create an account and install the app. I also hope to see calls covered, so I can call people from Matrix who are on Facebook Messenger, for example.