Hacker News Reader

To be clear, DNT being enabled by default was probably more harmful to DNT than helpful. DNT should have been a choice from users and a clear indication of intent; by making it Default, there was no conscious decision like there is with Ad-blocking. DNT should have been (be) the clear message from users they do or do not want something, an undeniable response to over-reaching TOSes.

Microsoft making it default felt less like something to help consumers and more just bandwagoning. Whether or not DNT was particularly effective as a means of __blocking__ tracking has always been irrelevant. The point was the __message__ sent by those who enabled it.

> they wasted it by simply asking advertisers like Google nicely if they'd like to stop tracking users or not

This is pretty blatant re-writing of history. DNT was a piss poor standard that relied on advertisers respecting it. As soon as Microsoft put it on by default they got shit on endlessly for it, and advertisers just bailed anyway.

again, HN was upset at Microsoft for doing it.

On an unrelated note, I think that's a really smart move on the part of the EU. Most of these companies do what they can not to pay taxes in Europe, and counteracting it is difficult without hurting other businesses or creating other kinds o bureaucracy. But with the GDPR, the EU can easily put million-dollar fees on these companies easily.

Any fines would likely go to court many times, before they actually have to be paid. And all those large corporations will show up with a huge mountain of lawyers to try and get around any law that may exist.

Taxing the large companies is difficult, because of individual countries (like Ireland and Netherlands) free-riding to attract investment, while hurting all other EU members. "Tragedy of the Commons" that sort of thing.

Fortunately GDPR includes class action against corporations and there was already one rejected (prior to GDPR) fro EU high court with 25.000 FB users. Now it wont be rejected.

> Most of these companies do what they can not to pay taxes

This applies to all companies, everywhere. The problem is that the EU don't close their loopholes.

Google has no problem with the GDPR. They helped draft it and are very prepared for it.

Google has huge problem with GDPR, their whole bussiness model is standing on tracking users, they are only smart enough not to piss into the wind. Actually they know far more about you than FB, imagine that they have almost everything you have on your android phone.

And let me explain "draft it". They lobbied. The proof for that is fb and ggl attack on Canada to prevent legalising something similar as GDPR.

Please (PLEASE, FOR GOD SAKE!), stop beeing protective to corporations, either FB, CocaCola, Tesla, Google or whatever comes to your mind. None is have priority in making world a better place, their only priority is money and power and money and they do not care about you more then a milking cow. If you disagree, you have fundamential lack of understanding how world functions.

When I will finally be able to speak my personal thoughts without beeing downvoted by fanboys with low self value who are bonding their self worth with a popular brand. Guys seriously, you need psychiatric care, you ARE WRONG but due to your own personal problems you are beeing pestilence to the world. It is simple to diagnose, just check your posts, if you are defending one brand, infront others you are flawed. Every brand does something wrong, but your perception is it is better.

Here you are having a study, about your behaviour, READ IT, you will thank me later, you are having issues worth psychiatrical care, help yourself and stop annoying the human race: https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/leave_my_br...

You're likely being downvoted because your comments break the site guidelines by being unsubstantive and/or uncivil. It's possible to make substantive points thoughtfully; when commenting here, please do that.

https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

As far as I have noticed, it always happens when you post criticism on rust, javascript, tesla or google (haven't tryed with apple, samsung,... maybe someone should, it would be a nice research). In past same was with FB and Microsoft while this improved and today you can criticise them without downvotes. I think, that it is a clear case of this: https://insight.kellogg.northwestern.edu/article/leave_my_br...

> Google has no problem with the GDPR. They helped draft it and are very prepared for it.

The opposite is true, despite Google having lobbied during the drafting. The entire premise of how google makes money conflicts with GDPR.

> They can't, and they'll learn it the hard way.

I doubt it. The fines will be completely irrelevant, and they won't even need to notify more than 1% of their lawyers and lobbyists to ensure they can keep it up for the next decade.

GDPR fines can be up to 4% of a company’s turnover (at group level too, not just the turnover of the local subsidiary). Whether the courts will actually use the maximum fine remains to be seen, but on paper it’s enough to give you pause - 4% of revenues is a large chunk of money for anyone. I work for a large EU company and this possibility is taken very seriously.

All I'm saying is I don't think the result will be a real improvement to privacy or data safety. I think it'll be some adjustments on paper, then business as usual.