GDPR COPE GENERAL /gcg/

>More government is always bad.

People are starting to realize their online actives are being recorded. Of course they want it to be illegal.

Attached: 1521303389959.gif (300x300, 892K)

great thread OP

>removing the (((data merchants))) from the digital temple
>hurting the internet
lol faggot

I thought I was on Jow Forums for one sec.

No, it's called trying to control what they shouldn't have any control over.

>you shouldn't have control over your own personal data
>corporations should be the ones in control of your own personal data
wat

Good. This means Jow Forums can't ban anymore anymore. All I have to do is call up the GDPR that they're violating the privacy rule with bans.

Explain how "safeguarding its citizenry from predatory data usage" falls under "things they shouldn't have any control over."

Protip: you can't, and you're probably gonna spout some regurgitated free market memes borrowed from internet libertarian cucks.

You misinterpeted what I posted, I meant the governments shouldn't control the internet.

More like control under the guise of protecting.

An IP is not person related data

Yes it is. IPs are attached to posts and thus personal info.

Tell me more about how enforcing undue surveillance opt-out is "control under the guise of protecting."

dont forget about zuckerberg getting grilled and the theme of the whole thing

Any control of the internet is a slippery slope, governments shouldn't dictate what should be free from anyone's control.
Stop being pedantic and go back to Jow Forumseddit.

Except it's not "controlling the internet" you illiterate corporate degenerate.

>Coporations should buy and sell our personal info
FUCK YOU

The basic idea is good and should be done, but coming from the EU it's obviously some sort of german trick.

>enforcing the "free services with strings attached should disclose the strings attached" doctrine is somehow censoring the internet
Inoperable fifty-sixitis.

Attached: 1510279419474.png (420x420, 11K)

Well I disagree, you might not care that leaders can shut down the internet in their country with a press of a button but I do.

>shut down the internet in their country with a press of a button
Do burgers seriously believe this is what GDPR is about?
They can't be this retarded, right?

normies are too dumb to realize that this regulation does not hurt FB or GOOG and actually benefits them because they can afford massive fucking armies of lawyers and compliance officers and their up and coming competition cannot. Normies are also too dumb to realize that this regulation doesn't fucking matter because they are still spied on by spy agencies and government contractors who are exempt from the regulation meaning the state that is supposed to be protecting you from your data being abused gets an exclusive license to fuck you long and deep.

Corporations have too much presence and control over content as it is, billionares like zuckerkike take advantage of idiots with shit like facebook.

It's been done in many places, the internet is severaly restricted by those who fear it's power.

as an american i don't care, i'm not in some faggy "profession" like webdev so this shit doesn't impact me in any negative way.

Attached: 1377055782087.jpg (400x525, 167K)

Which corporate lobby is paying you to false flag this hard?

LOL none, I was bbsing in the 80's and saw that killed by the inet; Now the internet is being manipulated by governments and corporations.

>NGINX logs users IP and get a million shekel fine
>freedom

Pick 1.

>Shit that won't happen
>You coming from Jow Forums acting like a tool

Pick both

Things log IPs all the time. Don't be a retard. It's literally impossible to sanely enforce this regulation uniformly, which means that the state is given the power to choose who to punish.

That's literally the opposite of justice, hence this law is not just.

You're not allowed to log IPs under GDPR. It violates the rules.

Come back when someone gets sued to remove an IP from an access log kiddo.

States are obsessed with spying, there is literally zero chance that a suit to get rid of plain IP addresses will ever go through

Right, so it's a non issue. GDPR is fine.

What a thin disguise for a blatant attack on justice.

Logging an IP would be against regulations. Many things log IPs alongside other common pieces of data. You are advocating for enforcing regulations only according to the whims of a government, which is wrong. Regulations should apply to all entities equally, that is justice.

If you don't value justice, that's fine. Just be honest.

Calm down Ivan, you would get a better response on the board you frequent normally

If I have a service and block the entire EU IP space and an EU users uses a VPN to subvert that, can I be fined for mining their data?

Here's the crux with the GDPR
The GDPR isn't about 'storing'
It's about 'soliciting', and 'mining'.
You are not allowed to ask for personal data in order to use a service, unless that personal data is essential to using that service... guess what IP addresses are?

IP addresses are a type of personal data that can be collected by default by a data controller without consent... because how otherwise are you going to access the service?
However they can't go around sharing your IP address with everybody willynilly.

I'm not sure what policy third party advertisements and associated tracking mechanisms fall under.

and the counter argument, Jow Forumsentoomen.

There is no argument to someone trying to bait about logging ip addresses as being a fineable offense and some of 'MUH BIG GUBERMENT' bullshit

If you don't operate in the middle yeast, and you never plan on going there, I think it's safe to round file any complaints.

Yes.
>The regulation applies if the data controller (an organisation that collects data from EU residents), or processor (an organisation that processes data on behalf of a data controller like cloud service providers), or the data subject (person) is based in the EU[1]
>the data subject (person) is based in the EU

>The GDPR isn't about 'storing'
>It's about 'soliciting', and 'mining'.
This isn't true. All forms of processing are included in the regulation.
>'processing’ means any operation or set of operations which is performed on personal data or on sets of personal data, whether or not by automated means, such as collection, recording, organisation, structuring, storage, adaptation or alteration, retrieval, consultation, use, disclosure by transmission, dissemination or otherwise making available, alignment or combination, restriction, erasure or destruction; Article 4, Definitions – (2) [2]

The number of lies ITT to spin GDPR in a positive light is insane. Anons, you have the sources now, you see the retarded shills, educate yourselves.

[1]en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Data_Protection_Regulation
[2]privacy-regulation.eu/en/article-4-definitions-GDPR.htm

...

What kinda hippy bullshit is that, I can't verify they aren't in the EU just based on IP. So I have to ask each user to submit a formal state ID before I can let them use the site?

All right fagtron, then how does an IP address constitute personal data that is not absolutely necessary to perform a service?

>international companies destroy their countries through brainwashing
>cock blocks other countries from de-brainwashing them

Because persistent storage isn't necessary to perform the service.

...

You could probably get away with just asking.

>Because persistent storage isn't necessary to perform the service.
Page view logs to show what articles you've read or haven't read based on your username or IP address. This would be persistent storage and is personal history.

You need to get affirmative consent, and ToS aren't legally binding so you'd need to have each user sign a contract.

will my Jow Forums acount get ban ? :-(

Sure. If you had such a service. But you probably wouldn't usually store page views by IP, would you? Then, that IP, or whatever dumb piece of now-protected data, is literally a million dollar liability. That's an insane amount of risk, unless your name is Google.

The point is, we can easily imagine scenarios where this law can't be enforced evenly, so it's not a good law. The fact of the situation is that companies have been rallying under the "data is power!" mantra for so long, and we've generated so many data sets and have built so much infrastructure around this data, that compliance with this law is not feasible in many circumstances.

>communism
>bad

Attached: y.png (645x614, 83K)

Right. GDPR is just a way to ensure and enforce sovereignty. Anyone against GDPR are either paid shills or brainwashed neocons completely inundated in corporate propaganda.

>In the meantime everyone sign this change.org petition, if it gets 400 signatures the president has to read it.
strawpoll.me/15769129 (embed)

>making b8 this obvious

>>falling for b8 this obvious

I'm not sure who to be disappointed in here

Or they simply don't want to forget information you freely gave away.

> deadliest event of the 20th century
> good

Attached: image.jpg (700x760, 341K)

>implying they didn't deserve it

>the internet is borderless
>therefore we're going to impose our laws on the entire world, even if you're not european
Every day the EU gets closer to being USA 2: Electric Boogaloo

kill yourself goldberg

This literally gives control over the data to people whose data is being used.

They had control of their data up until the point they uploaded their 1's and 0's to someone else's computer.

it takes energy to store something in computer

it doesnt actually take energy to when the computer is computing

This is no different from regulations that created accredited investors, in order to prevent everyday Americans from ruining themselves on the stock market.

Not everyone knows the implications of dumping their 1's and 0's to someone else's computer.

At some point you need to control the hungry wolves who are going to take advantage of the complete obliviousness of the average absolute pleb.

you all have had plenty of chances to choose to avoid companies who use your data in ways you disagree. encouraging socialist laws at the cost of my freedom to share my data with companies is stupid

the real issue is companies storing my data ehen i actually have not given consent and them completely neglecting it, like with equifax

sweat American tears. At least we got privacy laws. This time we fuck with you, American cucks

this is politics

Good. This country has devolved into a cesspool of money hungry kikes and retarded mutts. Let it all burn.

Attached: 1526705760796.jpg (900x676, 58K)

>can I be fined for mining their data?
Why are you doing this? If your business model is dependant on data mining, you deserve every fine possible.