I really can't remember the last time something positive to the world came from the USA ... I'm definitely biased as the news have turned into a non-stop fake fire alarm, but still
This is great. I'll wait to see the actual proposed legislation before judging it, but this summary indicates to me that the bill is severely lacking in two major respects. Unless it is missing from the summary, it doesn't appear to address data security requirements nor does it place limits on the types of data that can be collected.
Regardless, this is a step in the right direction, I just hope it isn't the only step and that it has some significant teeth. Most legislation like this seems to just be a tax on companies rather than a true penalty.
I'm excited to see something finally happening on this front. I'll be paying close attention as this develops. Here's hoping something positive actually happens.
Any bill must also take into account the huge spy operations of the government internally. "Protecting privacy" sounds cool from Meta, but is useless unless it also covers the TSA, CBP, NSA, etc.
WASHINGTON (AP) — Two influential lawmakers from opposing parties have crafted a deal on legislation designed to strengthen privacy protections for Americans’ personal data.
The sweeping proposal announced Sunday evening would define privacy as a consumer right and create new rules for companies that collect and use personal information.
While the proposal has not been formally introduced and remains in draft form, the bipartisan support suggests the bill could get serious consideration.
Congress has long discussed ways to protect the personal data regularly submitted by Americans to a wide range of businesses and services.
According to a one-page outline released Sunday, the bill worked out by McMorris Rodgers and Cantwell would strengthen rules requiring consumer consent before a company can collect or transfer certain kinds of information.
One provision of the proposal would allow consumers to opt out of targeted ads — i.e., advertisements sent to them based on their personal data.
The original article contains 339 words, the summary contains 152 words. Saved 55%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Something most Americans desire, something big tech and social media detest. Any vote against more privacy protections is a vote bought and paid for by billionaires and that's the real DC swamp doing it's business as usual.
Advertising is a core funding model for a lot of businesses. There is the legitimate the argument that upending it now could lead to the collapse of a lot of the tech sector. While I do believe we never should have gotten here in the first place, we should be cautious and methodical when unwinding it. We don't want a recession, and we need US businesses to be able to compete on the global stage.
Perhaps I just did a bad job of explaining my position; I agree. I just think it's worth considering the unintended consequences of a rug pull. Maybe we need to wean the industry off slowly or something else entirely. etc. all I was getting at was that caution doesn't immediately mean someone is bought and paid for by industry lobbies. There is nuance here.
Thinking about any unintended consequences is always good. I also agree that a 'rug pull' in general terms is not a good thing, however; since we are talking about the privacy of the consumer and turning said privacy into a consumer right, I don't think there will be a lot of negative consequences. The companies are going to complain but they do that no matter what.
Personally I think, any company that solely relies on selling user data as revenue stream deserves to go down.
Hot take, considering how ridiculous prices have gotten for things like housing and groceries, maybe a recession would be good and help reduce those prices. I'm not an economist so very much spitballing
