[HN Gopher] DuckDuckGo, Proton, Mozilla back bill targeting Big ...
___________________________________________________________________
DuckDuckGo, Proton, Mozilla back bill targeting Big Tech
'surveillance'
Author : mikece
Score : 177 points
Date : 2022-09-14 13:54 UTC (9 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (www.techradar.com)
(TXT) w3m dump (www.techradar.com)
| tacotacotaco wrote:
| From the bill's summary, "... prohibits the platform from
| restricting access to platform data generated by the activity of
| a competing business user." This sounds like it eliminates iOS's
| App Tracking Transparency.
| SamuelAdams wrote:
| Actual source:
|
| https://spreadprivacy.com/privacy-companies-call-for-vote/
| mikece wrote:
| Too bad Fastmail isn't on this list: I really like their email
| service.
| mxuribe wrote:
| Yeah, i half expected a bunch of "smaller" companies - like in
| the email space but not only email - to add their support as
| well. Would be really cool, if tons of smaller firms rally like
| mad around this, and make PR headlines to bring tons of
| attention to the lawmakers. Fingers crossed!
| GoblinSlayer wrote:
| Don't they provide unique aliases? That's a competitive
| advantage over protonmail in case of surveillance.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| ProtonMail purchased SimpleLogin which is a great email alias
| service.
| clairity wrote:
| i'd incidentally just learned about this a few days ago,
| posted here (with no traction):
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32782944 , which in
| turn links out to https://simplelogin.io/blog/simplelogin-
| join-proton/
|
| they have a limited free tier and a paid tier. i felt a
| little uneasy about the emails seemingly going through
| another set of servers (in plaintext?) for the filtering so
| i didn't sign up, but would love to hear other
| perspectives.
| encryptluks2 wrote:
| I absolutely love SimpleLogin. It is open source as well,
| so if for some reason the SaaS platform ceases then you
| can use a VPS. They support PGP encryption and hiding
| subjects too. They also have an open source app in the
| Fdroid marketplace.
| artificialLimbs wrote:
| Yes.
| b3morales wrote:
| Fastmail is an Australian company. Granted Proton isn't based
| in the US either, but their whole schtick is privacy, whereas
| Fastmail is "just" a commercial email provider. Note I have
| nothing against them, just saying there's no particular reason
| for this US legislation to be in their focus.
| rediguanayum wrote:
| They have a US office. Fastmail's "schtick" is that they very
| much support open IETF standards which I admire. Their CEO,
| Bron Gondwana, is a frequent participant at the IETF.
|
| Disclaimer: I work for a competitor of theirs, but work with
| Fastmail folks on standards development.
| ghastmaster wrote:
| Here is the text of the act.
|
| https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3816...
|
| The privacy and "surveillance" aspect only comes into play
| because these large platforms can pick and choose who they allow
| on their service, denying end users access to privacy protecting
| services.
|
| I use some of these services on big platforms. Right now, I do
| not see a need for legislation to fix the problem. I hate to see
| more legislation and regulation in general. Duckduckgo and Proton
| are doing great. In twenty years it is totally possible that they
| become the next Apple or Google. They can create the competition
| and allow users to make the choice. I would love to see a
| ProtonPhone.
| franczesko wrote:
| "I hate to see more legislation and regulation in general"
|
| With the same approach we would still have child labor in
| factories...
| amelius wrote:
| And no net neutrality.
| somenameforme wrote:
| Net neutrality was terminated in the US at the end of 2017,
| and this remains the case. An executive order in 2021 did
| not change this.
| belfalas wrote:
| I used to think this was a compelling argument.
| Unfortunately, child labor is really good economics. So is
| slavery.
|
| An economics textbook I studied at university calculated the
| value of a slave in the US before the Civil War. Conclusion?
| "Perhaps it is a good thing they did not try to quantize back
| then. Slavery was profitable."
| sammax wrote:
| What does child labour and slavery being profitable have to
| do with whether "without regulations we'd still have child
| labour" is a compelling argument?
| ghastmaster wrote:
| At the micro level it may sound like good economics.
| Slavery is not good macro economics. For example, slaves in
| the US south were intelligent human beings that had they
| been in the free market with their ideas and efficient use
| of time and labor, the south would have advanced beyond
| plantations at a similar rate to the north prior to the US
| civil war.
| troon-lover wrote:
| folkrav wrote:
| We should tell this to Dubai's migrant workers.
| ghastmaster wrote:
| Sexual harassment laws existed prior to the "me too"
| movement. Known harassers were still in positions within
| their companies. The cultural movement helped change the
| tolerance of this behavior. I sincerely doubt that anything
| but a small minority of children would be toiling away in
| factories today in the USA.
|
| In todays litigious USA, children would come with too much
| liability to employ in many many settings. Children are quite
| capable of doing many different jobs. Total exclusion from
| the workplace delays the earnings, experience, learning, and
| networking of people.
|
| Child labor laws have made exceptions for performers for some
| reason. I think most people would agree that this is fine.
| Why have we not made exceptions for other areas of work?
|
| A less regulated child labor market would find those
| exceptions naturally.
| skyyler wrote:
| A small minority already toils away in factories in the
| USA:
|
| >In fiscal year 2021, the division found 2,819 minors
| employed in violation of the law and assessed employers
| with nearly $3.4 million in civil money penalties.
|
| https://www.dol.gov/newsroom/releases/whd/whd20220729
|
| If it was legal it would be very widespread and you're
| lying to yourself if you say otherwise.
| cabbagesauce wrote:
| Oh come on, let's just admit that USA is much more sex-
| obsessed than the rest of the world..
| Crash0v3rid3 wrote:
| Do you have any data at all to back this up?
| fsflover wrote:
| > I would love to see a ProtonPhone.
|
| Depending on what you mean here, it might already exist:
| https://puri.sm/products/librem-5.
| nilespotter wrote:
| I really want to try this... but at $700, not $2000.
| fsflover wrote:
| It's $1300 for the standard version, not $2000.
| Alternatively, there is less performant
| https://pine64.org/pinephone.
| Stamp01 wrote:
| Why is the word "surveillance" in quotes? Is calling it
| surveillance controversial at this point?
| yumraj wrote:
| Shouldn't Apple be here too, given their _public stance_ on
| privacy?
| yamtaddle wrote:
| I suppose they lose some competitive advantage if being-mass-
| scale-creepy-stalker is no longer the norm (or, indeed, legal)
| in the rest of the industry.
| jjulius wrote:
| >Shouldn't Apple be here too, given their public stance on
| privacy?
|
| Keyword, "public".
| hericium wrote:
| This is a joke, right? Tim Cook is on an anti-privacy spree,
| using some ridiculous "children protection" slogans as a
| pretense for invasive, user-hostile changes.
| fsflover wrote:
| Link for those unaware:
| https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=28309202.
| mikece wrote:
| Apple talks privacy as a selling point but their actions leave
| a lot to be desired. They collect MASSIVE amounts of data about
| their users, possibly as much as Google does. Since Apple is
| raking in gigantic profits from high-margin products there's
| little motivation for them to try to monetize the data of their
| users, but there is absolutely nothing that would prevent them
| from doing so if they desired.
| Tozen wrote:
| Very good points. Additionally, Apple's silence speaks
| volumes as to what they are really about.
| clairity wrote:
| apple is still the least bad option, but make no mistake,
| their longer term strategy is all-in on services and content,
| which means becoming more invasive over time.
|
| i'm planning to get one more iphone (a 14 pro) but it's
| likely to be my last because of this direction. really hoping
| that the independent phone developers (pinephone, fairphone,
| etc.) have a decent consumer (not just techie) offering by
| the time i need the next phone after that.
| NoFactualActual wrote:
| Doesn't apple own an ad network? You can't even restrict which
| apps are allowed to use the internet in the first place, which
| is a gaping security hole in the context of protecting you from
| the apps you have on your phone. They aren't exactly pro-
| privacy.
| orangepurple wrote:
| To add to this, it's pretty convenient to firewall Android
| apps with AFWall+
| nr2x wrote:
| iCloud backups go to Apple as plain text by default because it
| lets them give data to cops and FBI. Apples privacy stance is
| marketing, pure and simple.
|
| The FBI asked, Apple delivered:
| https://www.reuters.com/article/us-apple-fbi-icloud-exclusiv...
| user3939382 wrote:
| Conspicuously missing is the EFF, who masquerades as a privacy
| watchdog which is actually there to promote anti-regulation of
| telecoms and other big tech and has historically accepted
| millions from FAANG and their leaders' charities.
| stonogo wrote:
| This is the first time I've seen a American news platform use the
| British version of "tabling." In US Congress, "tabling a bill"
| effectively means suspending action on it indefinitely. Only in
| British English is a bill "tabled for discussion."
| parineum wrote:
| I (an American) was actually unaware that "tabled" could mean
| the same as "shelved". I'd always heard those used as antonyms
| but I've also only really heard the word "tabled" used as it
| was in the articled, "tabled for discussion".
|
| I'm a bit suspicious I've heard it phrased that way for
| clarity's sake. Probably some good editors behind that.
| rhacker wrote:
| American here. Tabling to me means putting it on hold and
| coming back to it later when we have other things figured
| out.
| pessimizer wrote:
| It's an autoantonym, but one where different Englishes have
| chosen different preferences. Like "moot."
| triceratops wrote:
| Is "moot" an autoantonym? It just takes a different meaning
| depending on if it's a verb or an adjective.
| pessimizer wrote:
| It always has the _same_ meaning if you squint hard
| enough (like many autoantonyms.) A very similar meaning
| to "tabled", which is why it came to mind.
|
| If a question is moot, it has been proposed but isn't
| necessarily useful. It could be because it was a question
| about a decision that has already been taken, or it could
| be because it's the first time the question has been
| asked.
|
| If a motion has been tabled, it is an issue that is
| pending a decision (on the table.) When Americans table a
| motion, they're saying that the _only thing_ currently
| being done with the issue is to leave it on the table
| (active) to be dealt with later. When others table a
| motion, they 're putting it on the table to be dealt with
| now.
|
| Americans leave things on the table to be dealt with,
| others put things on the table to be dealt with.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-09-14 23:02 UTC)