Hacker News Reader

Comment by stackskipton | Hacker News Reader

>I am not even sure what would be an appropriate remedy at this point.

It will have to be political and it's got to be fines/damages that are business impacting enough for companies to pause and be like A) Is it worth collecting this data and storing it forever? and B) If I don't treat InfoSec as important business function, it could cost me my business.

It also clear that certification systems do not work and any law/policy around it should not offer any upside for acquiring them.

EDIT: I also realize in United States, this won't happen.

View on HN

I agree but I think the problem will be if the consequences are that dire then entire classes of business will cease to exist OR the cost of doing things properly will be passed on to the consumer.

I struggle to see how data brokers, social media, etc are a net benefit to society so would be happy to see those sorts of businesses cease to exist, but I suspect I'm in the minority.

The entire targeted advertising industry is basically a progressive tax.

The "social contract" is that many services are fully or partially financed by advertising. Rich people produce more ad revenue (because they spend more), but they get the same quality of service, effectively subsidizing access for the poorer part of the population, who couldn't afford it otherwise.

If we break this social contract down, companies will still try to extract as much revenue as possible, but the only way to do that will be through feature gating, price discrimination, and generally making your life a misery unless you make a lot of money.

<< generally making your life a misery unless you make a lot of money.

Wait.. are you saying that we are currently living through the best of all worlds version of things?

The State of Illinois is going to lose its "business" already for other reasons. Do you think there is a reasonable privacy regime that prevents health systems from knowing where their patients live or using that information to site clinics?

Why is my data freely and instantly available within a centralized "health system" to begin with? Why can't we implement a digital equivalent of clunky paper records? Everything E2EE. Local storage requiring in person human intervention to access. When a new provider wants my records from an old one there should be a cryptographic dance involving all three parties. Signed request, signed patient authorization, and then reencryption for the receiving party using the request key.

What the health system should impose is a standard for interoperability. Not an internal network that presents a juicy target.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com