Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding EU privacy rules

Re:Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding E... by vkou on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @05:22PM (#25436031)

1. It's incredibly naive to think that the sole purpose of regulations is to protect powerful businesses. If you think that's the case, what would you describe the purpose of, say, worker safety regulations is? Food inspectors?

2. Of course they further political aims. Anything that has to do with law is political, by definition. This statement makes regulations sound scary and sinister, but actually imparts no information to the discussion.

A world without regulations won't be some libertarian paradise. It'll be an authoritarian dystopia, where the powerful can do what they please, and you will have zero proactive recourse against them, and very limited reactive recourse.

PS. Consider that a rule, or even aversion against regulation is itself a regulation. Which absolutely has side effects[1] that protect powerful businesses, and is pursued for personal and political aims.

[1] Very obvious ones, actually.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Facebook to move UK users to California terms, avoiding E... by chrisseaton on Tuesday December 15, 2020 @05:23PM (#25436047)

> It's incredibly naive to think that the sole purpose of regulations is to protect powerful businesses.

I listed two other example purposes in my comment alone! So obviously I don't think this.

> Of course they further political aims.

Did you miss the rest of the sentence? I said specifically ...even if those are not actually in the interests of any consumers.

[ Parent | on HN ]