Oh I LOVE this, we can't have enough of these privacy-focused non-profits making tech companies' lives difficult. They have such a strong argument here, too. I can imagine that whoever came up with this is very pleased with theirselves, and rightfully so.
It’s a very European concept, that making life difficult is a worthy pursuit. LinkedIn sucks, and I hate this feature. But that’s why I hardly use it and don’t pay them any money.
> It’s a very European concept, that making life difficult is a worthy pursuit
This is an incredibly bold statement, and something I really cannot relate to having lived in Europe for over a decade.
It comes across as more of a knee-jerk reaction from someone who believes oversight or accountability of any kind is by definition a needless burden.
I’m an incredibly bold guy. And I would personally just stop operating in the EU if it was between that and being accountable to their bureaucrats.
So you don't want to be accountable to users, or to bureaucrats? If you had to choose one who would it be?
Might be tough for a Florida-man to understand but there's a difference between being bold and being an a-hole.
Yeah, that's a very... interesting definition of "bold". One might argue that since operating inside a regulated environment is so out of his comfort zone, setting up shop in the EU would be the bold thing to do.
Maybe I’ll set up shop in the EU one day :)
Will you welcome me with open arms as long as I warn my users that my app uses cookies?
Nobody's holding a gun to your head, you're welcome to setup shop in the most anarchist society you can find. Good luck with whatever version of "operating" you're able to manage while there :)
Why would I move to London?
Despite Brexit propaganda, the UK still has bureaucrats and regulation. Try again :)
Edit: in case this was an attempted swipe at me, I'm not British, btw ;)
London is safer than many american cities, what are you talking about?
edit: removed snark
You do know that "the bureaucrats" is just a slur for our democratically elected government, right?
In other words, the will of the people.
Yeah but the opponents of the people literally believe democracy is bad and want to go back to monarchism in the form of unaccountable CEO kings that decide the will of the people.
Sadly this is like half the tech workforce too. People too brainwashed to see how destructive their work is to the world.
I believe it is up to the other half to stand up for decency, for democracy and for the rule of law.
Don't be quiet, don't just let things happen. Use your voice while you still have it!
I am actively working on several senate and congressional campaigns, believe me that these people want to actively imprison some of these CEOs for the destruction they wrought upon the world too. These stump speeches tend to get the crowds most riled up too. :D
Thuper thcary. I’m shaking in my boots. My timbers are completely and utterly shivered.
I'm not trying to scare you, just letting you know I'm someone that does more than advocacy. I'm actively organizing with people that share my values.
It's a great feeling, definitely a defining human trait that everyone should experience.
Hopefully you find your tribe someday.
Bonding with leftists over fantasies of throwing your opposition in jail. I doubt any of that is even real, but if it is, that’s sad.
If it makes you feel better to pretend I’m not surrounded by love, then by all means, add that to the pile of things you’re pretending.
Why don't you want to talk to me about London anymore D:
Please don't twist language in semantic games.
Once you work to demolish democracy, you are not the opposition in the sense that democracies use the word - e.g. somebody who disagrees with government policy, but not with the constitutional order itself.
You instead become an enemy of democracy and of our society.
Democratic states have defense mechanisms against that sort of putschist - jail is not some fantasy, but a natural consequence.
I wouldn't take them too seriously, there's strong indication that they're just trolling for the lols and aren't interested in an actually substantive discussion.
The far-right is never just joking or doing things for the lols. It is a thin shield to prevent being called out.
https://www.npr.org/2021/04/26/990274685/how-extremists-weap...
I'm not convinced this person is far-right, but even so there are smarter ways of repudiating them, that's all I'm saying.
What? Of course it isn't! I mean, I guess you could argue that it's technically a slur in the sense that it is disparaging, but obviously the guy knows that he's being disparaging- you use that word to draw connection to identitarian slurs which are inherently wrong, and bureaucrat is not that. It also refers specifically and exclusively to the parts of the government that aren't democratically elected; the opposite of what you're saying.
Even setting that aside, 'the fat cheeto and his deplorable clowns in congress' is a slur for a democratically elected government, "the will of the people". So what? We shouldn't be allowed to insult a democratically elected government for some reason? Democracies are certainly preferable to autocracies, but that doesn't mean 'democratically elected' is a synonym for 'good'.
"you use that word to draw connection to identitarian slurs which are inherently wrong" you are reading into this too much, slur is often used as a word for a general insult.
Doesn't make a lot of sense to me to respond to 'I don't want to deal with their bureaucrats' with 'You do realize that's an insult, right?'. Yeah, he realizes, he is clearly trying to be insulting. It's only an insult because of that intent, in fact. A lot more sensible if the intent is to suggest that the word ought not be used because it is an insult beyond what is acceptable in polite society, which is the much more common usage of 'slur'.
Not to say it's impossible you're right that it's being brought up irrelevantly, but I do think the odds are on my side and I further think it would be worth writing a sentence calling that out even if they weren't.
His point, I assume, was that many people insulting beurocrats think that those are somehow seperate from the people they elected i.e. it's not some unidentifiable blob responsible for these things but the person /you/ voted for. At least that's my charitable interpretation.
It’s about having rights, and exercising them. If companies find that difficult to work with then they’re not even hitting the minimum baseline.
Also why should we allow such companies to exist if the vast majority of people don't like their actions? There's no fundamental right to starting a business, so might as well make businesses socially acceptable rather than fucking the public for profit.
As everyone knows, there are no soldiers, or litigation lawyers, or security guards, or investigative journalists, or police, or home inspectors, in America, since everyone understands it would be inappropriate to make life difficult for bad actors. The one true way is to lie down for corporations, and tell anyone who doesn't like it that they're free to live in the woods and interact with no-one if they appreciate personal liberty so much.
You think standing in for people's rights against the profit interests of transnational corporations means "making life difficult"? Whose life exactly? That of the CEO of Microsoft?
Hey, he MIGHT be that CEO one day. Currently he’s temporarily embarrassed billionaire.
> Oh I LOVE this, we can't have enough of these privacy-focused non-profits making tech companies' lives difficult.
Literally the comment I replied to.
it is a very American concept, that company interests should be placed above human interests and rights.
Well, not all Americans. Just ones of a specific political bent that is common on this site. And the wealthy ones, because they have the money hoarding disease
[flagged]
a generic "europe bad" comment doesnt deserve much more than a generic "america bad" comment as a reply
I would hope for better. Threads descending into nationalism are rarely interesting.
> The most important principle on HN, though, is to make thoughtful comments. Thoughtful in both senses: civil and substantial
https://news.ycombinator.com/newswelcome.html
if that was truly the "most important principle", there wouldnt be hundreds of upvoted "ai slop", "microslop", "github has 4 9s... 89.999! lolol", etc. comments every day.
i have several other thoughts on the topic in general, and your light chastising, but its probably not the place or time.
When an entity becomes almost a monopoly, surely the rules about some behaviours should be stronger
> It’s a very European concept, that making life difficult is a worthy pursuit.
It's really hard to understand concepts when you're internationally masking and misleading yourself.
Obviously no one things "making life difficult is a worthy pursuit", but, doing the right thing sometimes is worth a bit of the difficulties it introduces, this is why you see moves like this.
You don't pay them anything but you are the product, genius !
Oh wow, I’ve never heard that one before. I had no idea!
making life difficult for _people i don't like_ is a worthy pursuit
You force yourself onto my life (because, for various reasons, most of the career listings are there for example) and then you attempt to make it miserable too, by using and abusing every FOMO tool in the box ?
You bet your ass I'm going to make your life difficult. If you want it to stop, you're the one with the ball on your side of the court, you know exactly what to do.
It's a very American concept, to believe you can just ignore systems and networks. The guy shitting in your yard every day doesn't go away just because you're not looking at him do it.
This is 100% going to be the boot lickiest comment I read all day
Weird thing to say when I’m specifically refusing to acknowledge the EU’s perceived authority tbh. I’m an American, so it’s in my best interest for American companies to thrive. If you’re not, then I guess it would be more accurate to describe me as THE BOOT ITSELF.
Bro thinks he's on the team
You're refusing to acknowledge the authority of democratic institutions and instead defend unelected oligarchs. If that isn't boot licking, I don't know what is.
Making the lives of those that wish to exploit us and monetize our relationships on their enshittified platforms is not the same as making everyone's life difficult.
I would say that they are the first that decide to make everyone's life harder on purpose, first. Trying to pay them back is the least somebody could do
[flagged]
Please don't post national/regional slurs to HN. I agree that it's different when you're part of the group, but from a moderation point of view the effect on the threads ends up being bad anyway.
https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Thank you for pointing that out. Fair point. Sorry for spoiling the atmosphere.
Don't worry! it happens naturally because it's the way people speak in small conversations, and in that context perfectly ok.
The unnatural part is us trying to steer this large/public conversation away from the standards of small/private conversation, which is basically impossible but also a must, if HN isn't to self-destruct.
Edit: there's an additional twist, too, which is that HN's form factor feels like a smaller and more intimate conversation than it really is. That's great in many ways! But it obscures the fact that when people post here, they're really broadcasting to a large audience.
Correction, we hate making money at the expense of other peoples rights and liberties. It's kind of frustrating to have to explain that to US folks over and over again... all that "freedom" in their things is apparently very decorative.
Depends on what you mean by right. Oftentimes it's rephrased as "The other guy's obligation".
Care to elaborate on that?
You have the obligation to not do things at the expense of others' freedoms.
I'd say instead that we value the commons and don't like companies making money by externalising all their problems to the general public.
If company Foo leaks my personal data, I suffer, they don't, so without regulation there's no reason for them to invest in protecting it. Same with pollution and similar
I'm european (what a vague term...) and I disagree completely. I have never seen this attitude you apparently have. I've seen lots of celebration of innovation and entrepreneurship, I've seen less appreciation for the american style "anything goes as long as the stock price goes up" business environment.
I don’t agree. I run a startup in Europe for a couple of years. I never had once someone hating in me because we are successful. Literally everyone I talked with abiut it thinks its super cool what we do and supported the efforts and wished us best of luck or offered actual help.
The Europeans are very aware of the externalities of businesses. This translates to more bureacracy and often also into pretty dumb “solutions” (cookie banner). Gdpr is not one of those dumb solutions btw. Its annoying to implement, true, and it puts EU business at a disadvantage compared to US businesses, but it gives also power to the people. And that is what counts in the end.
Ask yourself: do you really want to live in a Jarvinian techno-monarchy, where companies are the ultimate power holders? I am not so sure I want that.
My hope for the future is that Europeans will eventually build proper alternatives to US companies and escape the chokehold. Then we all play by our own rules and no one is at a disadvantage. Seems like a pipe dream now, but then I remember that England ruled the world not so long ago and China was a third world country nit worth mentioning. Things can turn quickly!
One more thing: Brussel really goes too far, too often. So I am always crossing my fingers for more market liberal parties to gain influence. I dont like a huge government. Not at all. But i dont believe in the nightwatch government idea either.
Being an European doesn't make your arguments less ridiculous.
It must be rememebered that this is the forum of an American investment company. There are far too many here who would love to be the corprate boot crushing us underfood.
"In Ireland, people have an interesting attitude toward success—they look down on it. In America, you look at the mansion on the hill and think, 'One day that will be me.' In Ireland, people say, 'One day, I'm going to get that bastard!'"