- cross-posted to:
- privacyguides@lemmy.one
- world@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- privacyguides@lemmy.one
- world@lemmy.world
Europe’s most famous technology law, the GDPR, is next on the hit list as the European Union pushes ahead with its regulatory killing spree to slash laws it reckons are weighing down its businesses.
The European Commission plans to present a proposal to cut back the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR for short, in the next couple of weeks. Slashing regulation is a key focus for Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, as part of an attempt to make businesses in Europe more competitive with rivals in the United States, China and elsewhere.
You must log in or register to comment.
@EUCommission@ec.social-network.europa.eu are you trying to become the USA? Deregulation will make us just like them! Don’t undo all the good work you did!
Oh boy what can go wrong?
There is one thing that would make the GDPR easier: one single Data Protection Authority at Union level, with direct sanctioning powers.
No more asking Ireland first only to get Norway and Germany telling you the opposite.
Yes this is the exact moment that we decide we want to be as similar to the US as possible. These neoliberals need to go.
That’s a funny way of saying liberals
gross why are they getting rid of the best thing they’ve done?
Preventing total exploitation harms corporate short-term profits.
Privacy matters, but it is really not good in its current shape. For example, it seriously hinders scientific research into contagious diseases because a lot of data of patients is incredibly hard to get or work on. There’s a lot more that could be done against epidemics if it wasn’t for the GDPR in its current shape.
Ask for concent, its not hard.
This is not about consent but about databases that already exist and that could be anonymized easily, treasure troves of data for medical research, but even anonymously that data can’t be used because of stupid red tape
You do realise that most medical research these days is for-profit? The only thing opening these databases to medical research will do is increase the profit lining the pockets of the already mega wealthy (and corrupt) industrial medical complex.
Jfc you tankie, just because someone makes money from selling medication, do you really think the person receiving the medication is sad about the existence of the medication? You are literally saying “let’s not cure or prevent diseases because someone could make money from it”, how removed can you be
Also, I was talking about state funded medical research into how the spread of contagious diseases could be halted, which would only have resulted in regulatory actions. That’s just one example. Get your head out of your own ass
Schrödingers patient. They would gladly give all their data to for profit businesses to then sell an expensive cure when not asked, but they would not be willing to give consent when asked…
Especially in the case of medical data it is relatively easy to break anonymization. If you make the data sellable the first to buy will be insurance companies so that they can begin pushing for coverage to not be universal, but rather based on how healthy you are and maybe even denying coverage for your lung cancer at 60 because you used to smoke in your 20s…
And the people who have the kind of diseases that would benefit greatly from research on it, will be first to be hung to dry in such a system.
Consent is red tape?
If you want to ask every person in an anonymized database for consent, yes
You consent to your data going in to a database first, and that it will be used for medical research.
Fucking assholes, taking away gdpr and pushing for chatcontrol.
We should have democratic mechanisms to vote these politicians out of office when they start messing up.
what the fuck
Don’t do it, you really don’t want to try and race us to the bottom when we have a solid head start.
If they can make GDPR more simple easier to comply with, it would do wonders.
The only part of GDPR that requires any effort is the ability to export and delete user data, which is good design in software any way.
Most companies breaking GDPR go out of their way to break it
One thing that’s symptomatic for anti-GDPR sentiment in general are “cookie banner” discussions. As if the EU had ever told anyone they need cookie banners! You absolutely don’t need them if you’re not randomly throwing around data. And people should know better, just from seeing titles on said cookie banners like “Your privacy is important to us and our 1234 partners” (and that’s not even exaggerated!). In addition, “cookie banner” is a misnomer too, as the thing you’re really setting up is not cookie behavior but data-spreading behavior.
As an addendum: At a former employer, we ran an online survey which we announced through a small notification on the page. I didn’t want it to be too annoying, so included a “go away” button in the notification. That button wrote an extremely GDPR-compliant cookie that simply stored the preference. One of my co-workers was careless enough to casually mention this to a high-ranking American employee who then questioned me whether we shouldn’t include that cookie on the cookie banner, etc. It took a while to set that straight.
That American was the same person who was responsible for combining browsing behavior on employer’s website with a third-party chat provider, so either AI or human agents could open a chat box on specific people’s screens and ask them creepily specific questions about whether they’d like to buy any of the products they’d been looking at on former employer’s site over the past months.
There are a lot of people who don’t even understand the basics of what GDPR is trying to do but whose job it is, to create GDPR-compliant things.
Actually, it’s quite easy to comply with. Don’t collect any data you don’t need in order to conduct legitimate business with the person you’re collecting data from. Delete collected data once you don’t need them anymore. And you’re done.
I‘m afraid they‘re aiming to erase privacy instead, but I have hope I might be wrong.
If a proposal comes from Mrs VDL, you can always assume the worst, and the most corrupt option imaginable.
What do you find hard to comply with? What would you “simplify”?
Its not that complex in practice. The problem is that there it’s industry is trying to make it seem more complicated than it is so you’ll have to hire one of those contractors.
Seems to me like the EU wants to pander to the USA to get market access. Alphabet, Microsoft and Meta are licking their lips.
It’s about the same with DORA.
It’s really not that complicated. I don’t see what they could do to “simplify” it and not ruin it.
My first reaction was disdain, but I think we at least need to wait for the actual proposal to form an opinion.
