Hacker News Reader

Comment by A4ET8a8uTh0 | Hacker News Reader

Interesting. It would appear maybe I was wrong about general sentiment towards privacy in US. CA law did not surprise that much and most dismissed it as 'what will they do next', but Ohio is not exactly blue, which would suggest some people are finally getting a little fed up with status quo.

All this against backdrop of nationwide corps having tried to stop this exact scenario ( patchwork of state privacy laws ).

View on HN

Privacy ain't a red or blue issue. It's a human issue.

In my heart of hearts, I agree with you. My cynical surface would just want to take this moment to kinda spread my hands as if to show that our current existence has been ridiculously politicized. You may not think it is a blue issue, but -- and I am not trying to derail this thread -- I just want to make an argument, isn't abortion a human issue?

Yeah, bringing up abortion here? original conservatives were actually in favor of abortion because it the government did not have the right to tell you what you could do with you body.

It wasn't until early '70's when G.O.P. figured out they could win the ultra religious voters by catering to this specific issue. Noam Chomsky has an excellent dialogue about this

Ohio isn't exactly pro-consumer at all. The Affirmative Defense section of the bill kind of highlights that, IMHO.

> Businesses that satisfy requirements for the affirmative defense are afforded protection from any cause of action brought under Ohio laws, or in Ohio courts, alleging a violation of the OPPA or similar claims based on alleged violations of the Ohio Consumer Sales Practices Act’s privacy-related provisions.

It also prohibits citizens from suing violators of the law.

Sounds to me like this is more about protecting businesses from litigation than it is about protecting consumers. I'm curious if the CCPA or Colorado's law have similar language; my suspicion is that they don't.

Though, I'd love it if my beliefs were proven wrong here.

I agree. The law authorizes only the attorney general to crack the whip, and limits that prosecutorial discretion with an blanket affirmative defense. Who wins here?

The state government gains the ability to selectively harass west coast tech companies. Since west coast tech companies are perceived as left-wing institutions, state legislators probably anticipate that media coverage of the attorney general harassing them in court will poll well with voters in Ohio.

I don’t know, that might be optimistic. There is infinitely more talk about how big tech is bad than how privacy is good in “red” areas.

A cudgel’s a cudgel though, and this one came with blueprints.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com