Hacker News Reader

Comment by x5n1 | Hacker News Reader

All countries should create their own facebooks and invite Americans to join theirs. It's sort of stupid to allow Facebook into any country unless all of its business operations and servers are based in the said country with proper controls. Even then that does not preclude the US government forcing Facebook to turn over data on Non-US citizens to itself.

Facebook is the #1 vector of US government's indiscriminate spying on everybody's else's citizens. Google comes a close second, but you don't generally give Google as many personal details as you give to Facebook. At least not by your own free will.

And that's really the problem that France has, everyone uses American services so America can basically create a dossier on everyone. No one uses French services other than French citizens, and perhaps a few other souls.

View on HN

Next week's EU data protection "safe harbour" decision may require exactly that: Facebook may no longer be allowed to export personal data from the EU.

Edit: data protection would also have a huge effect on the "peeple" app, discussion of which seems to be banned on HN.

Nobody should be allowed to export personal data from such jurisdictions except for the owners of that data themselves. A U.S.-ian should be allowed to decide to trust their personal data to a company inside E.U. jurisdiction but that company shouldn't be allowed to trade that data anywhere else (especially, back to the U.S.). Of course, that's a complete pipe dream, and I'm just hallucinating.

How do you define "export"? Does that mean any website needs to have a server located in every single country in the world?

I imagine that would only apply to sites which store PII[1]. The database should be located under the same jurisdiction (which doesn't mean every country, since some will have treaties to allow exporting to certain places (EU for example)) as the person whose data it is, and the data should not be transferred through other jurisdictions.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Personally_identifiable_inform...

Well, pretty much any website stores an email, name and password. Every startup would need to look at all the bilateral treaties between every major country in the world. This is simply impractical.

If a German user shares data with Facebook, Facebook should not be allowed to give the data to any entities in the US.

You may never give userdata to anyone else or give anyone else access to userdata.

Embedding tracking scripts from third parties is equally problematic. Google Analytics should be globally forbidden.

What if the user shares the data directly with a server in the US? People don't care...

And what if Google Analytics tracks me? 3rd-party tracking needs to be illegal right now.

That would only force people to confront the uncomfortable reality that just because data is about you doesn't mean you own it.

So you're basically suggesting that every country should build their own Great Firewall?

Whose side are you on?

Already in proposal stage in many places. My current home, Thailand, just announced plans for their own version. I am not amused.

However, hilarity has already ensued. The gov here is so incompetent that they couldn't even make an annoucement without having a bunch of gov websites taken down by a manual DDOS attack yesterday [1]. A few thousand people coordinated via social media to repeatedly visit the gov's ICT website which brought it to a standstill. Yet the gov thinks they can manage a single internet gateway to facilitate surveillance and it won't be ruinous.

[1] http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/general/714432/single-gatewa...

The alternative is that Microsoft, Apple, Facebook, etc build their own Great Firewalls and become countries. I'd prefer that but many people have a strong sentimental attachment to countries based on geography.

Better solution, don't allow governments to spy in the first place. Facebook and Google don't want to give up data, they are effectively being coerced into handing over data.

> Facebook and Google don't want to give up data, they are effectively being coerced into handing over data.

How do you know this? They get paid for the data and selling it to the government guarantees that they will be allowed to keep collecting it in the future. It's clearly a mutually beneficial agreement.

They shouldn’t collect most of that data in the first place.

You have a choice to use their services, don't use Facbeook, don't use Google. They do not have a choice to hand over data.

I do not have a choice. Google Analytics hits me everywhere, even if I do not use a Google account.

Other people having my number on their phone means Google collects that data, too.

Same with Facebook.

I have no choice to opt out, so unless they provide me such a choice, they have to be regulated by law.

You misunderstand the word 'choice'. You have a choice to go on sites with Google Analytics, you are not being coerced into using their products. You have a choice to not give out your number to those whom have Android phones, you have a choice not to use Facebook. You have a lot of choice, you are just choosing not to use the alternatives. Whereas Google and Apple are being threatened by force to hand over data, they do not have a choice.

On your last point, you want the same people who demand and coerce data from Google and Apple, also be the same people who make the rules for Google and Apple?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com