51
heyheni
36d

Did you read about the new Digital Services Act and Digital Markets Act laws of the European Union, that will go in effect in 2022? Pretty neat stuff, more transparency, user rights and a tool against internet monopolies.

"Very big online plattforms" must submit reports on freedom of speech, abuse of human rights, manipulation of public opinion.
EU assigned scientists will gain access to trade secrets like google search or Amazon recommendation algorithm to analyze potential threats.
The EU can fine serial offenders 10 % of their yearly income. And break up companies that stiffle competition.
Internet companies like Facebook will not be permitted to share user data between their products like Instagram and WhatsApp.
There will be a unified ruleset on online advertisement. Each add must have the option to find out why this add is shown to the user.
Unlike the GDRP data protection rule the two acts will be valid at the Union level. So that there won't be any exceptions from single member states.

Let's hope this leads to a better Internet and not things like cookie pop ups 😄

Link to the EU DMA DSA page
> https://ec.europa.eu/digital-single...

Comments
  • 16
    Damn, this looks pretty progressive. Hope it works in practice.
  • 7
    Let's hope they will make a stricter policy on declining whatever we don't want. Not just notify the user about cookies
  • 16
    It's good and bad. Good in that it's more consistent. Bad in that it sets a subjective bar for what defines a "gatekeeper."

    And let's be real, it's targeting big tech, and basically nothing else.
  • 3
    @SortOfTested Big tech affects medium tech, medium tech affects small tech. This will be felt down to the single-maintainer open source android apps through its effect on the role of standards and API access, if they can do it right.
  • 6
    @homo-lorens
    Ok, let me rephrase that. Its mostly a way to fine the big american tech companies.
  • 9
    "EU assigned scientists" who will deffo not be politically motivated in what so ever way..
  • 7
    @SortOfTested That's probably a major motivation for it.
  • 4
    Exactly what kind of political motivation would you assign to a scientist working for the EU, that's more harmful than a complete lack of supervision?
  • 1
    @homo-lorens Will let you think that one out by yourself. If you can't see it, there's literally no point in me explaining it.
  • 3
    @myss I see a lot of possible paths for political influence from democratic governments who serve people. All of them are positive influence, since by themselves big tech serves capital and nothing else.
  • 3
    @homo-lorens
    Something has to fund greece and spain, amirite?
  • 6
    I hope that it will have more impact than the GDPR. The latter is still barely noticable if you use a web firewall to block the pop-up dialogues everyone stapled on top on their site as a shitty excuse to not change any behaviour whatsoever...
  • 0
    @SortOfTested I'm not a big fan of what Greece is doing but it's still better than making incomprehensibly rich people even richer.
  • 2
    Especially at the cost of degrading society by regulating our perceived reality with algorithms built exclusively to grab our attention without regard to harmful tendencies.
  • 2
    That sounds fucking wonderful. Thanks for sharing!
  • 3
    Look, my point is that pretty much nothing except empowering literal maniacs is worse than the current situation, that secret algorithms maintained by unaccountable companies motivated only by profit determine what we experience as real. Will this be abused? Perhaps. Could it be done better? Probably. Is it worse than what we have? Certainly not.
  • 3
    @homo-lorens > "All of them are positive influence"

    I'm sure the individuals who didn't agree with Stalin, Mao, Castro, Chavez, etc..etc felt a different kind of influence. It's only positive when 'your side' is making all the influence.
  • 4
    @PaperTrail How do dictators come to the picture? All significant powers in the EU are democracies.
  • 2
    It's not like Stalin's gonna take over Google. At worst, German and French interests will be able to influence it, provided they can publicly defend their concerns, which is only fair considering how much effect Google has over Germany and France.
  • 1
    Yeah but that only 3 people know the coca cola recipe is alright. Let be guess? Because there are alternatives? Well let me quickly order a computer off aliexpress so I can Bing how Firefox EU laws will get some day. After clicking through 7 popups I might get an answer from Quora. Sent from my Linux computer.

    Get real. This whole "what are you actually doing" deal of lawmakers completely eliminating competition from online markets just because they don't know what's going on and THAT THERE ARE IN FACT TONS OF ALTERNATIVES AROUND. We fight monopolies by just having nothing. Nice. Fuck this. It's sad.
  • 1
    Coming up 2050: Knives have to be blunt. Researchers found, that a knive cuts things if you use it.
  • 1
    @nitwhiz That may be for something like Google (although it's impossible to get a video outside YouTube to outrank a remotely relevant YouTube video), but social networks' monopoly relies on complete internal compatibility and no external compatibility, and the number of users. If Messenger and Facebook can't share a database, they have to either remain incompatible or use an open protocol, which opens the gates for small messaging services that are otherwise struggling purely due to the lack of users.
  • 2
    @homo-lorens >" All significant powers in the EU are democracies."

    Sure..lets go with that.

    My point is when governments start picking winners and losers, eventually, someday, you'll lose. Governments don't have a good track record of staying in their lanes.

    Picking on the big tech (just like the "evil rich") is easy+popular because its "them" and not "us". Slippery slope? I hope not. Maybe a good thing? I hope so. History tells me otherwise.
  • 0
    @PaperTrail There are no plans for governments picking winners and losers. These are scientists appointed by the European Union, not governmental agents. They might have some political motivations, but they can't just do whatever.
  • 0
    @homo-lorens so you're saying that social networks these days don't have APIs?

    Did anyone of you actually ever *use* the data scraped by e.g. facebook to advertise your product to people based on an extremely narrow target group by putting an ad on facebook with their ads manager?
    It's a bliss. Don't ruin it. Watch TV if you like irrelevance.
  • 0
    @nitwhiz I'm saying that it's illegal according to the API terms to use it to provide similar functionality, making it unsuitable for competition.
  • 1
    @PaperTrail It's pretty obvious that forcing corporations to share the trade secrets their entire business depends on is a bit of a stretch, so they have to be careful not to overstep their boundaries. No significant government in the EU has such a comfortable margin over its opposition that they can afford a fight with Google.
  • 0
    @homo-lorens > "These are scientists appointed by the European Union, not governmental agents"

    A little word play ..

    The scientists appointed to determine if smoking is bad for you were appointed by Phillip Morris, not Marlboro.

    I get it, politics are a religion to a lot of people. European Union, Democrats, Republicans, pick your poison. Its hard to imagine they are made up of people, and people are, well people.
  • 2
    Both sides are usually corrupt. All consist out of people that initially wanted to do the ethically right things.

    At some point they start deviating from that path. May it be to get better along with others who have taken the same path or just doing not the ethically right thing went against the goals of the organization or just got a little bit easier every time.

    So in that sense, no government or company can ever be fully black or white.

    Personally, though I choose to believe more governments. They are usually behind the time, conservative, and so on but have the primary goal to keep their country running. Companies on the other hand have not the goal of helping their customers but to make profit (at least the big ones that can be invested in).

    Sure there are corrupt politicians who launder money or have some other goals. Same applies to managers though.

    One possible gray area is governments having lots of shares in companies.

    ---

    I'm tired now. I won't follow this tread more.
  • 0
    So, they want to support free speech or ban it..
  • 2
    It's a pity more (any..) social medial networks don't have API's, since usually their own front end client is shit.
  • 1
    So here is another reason why this legislation is important.
    The state of Texas just sued Facebook and Google today for an "unlawful agreement". Google and Facebook possible violated anti thrust laws by agreeing on, not to compete with each other on brookering ads across the internet.

    “ The agreement, the complaint says, fixes prices and allocates markets between Google and Facebook.”

    Wired - Texas acuses Google and Facebook of illegal conspiracy
    https://wired.com/story/...
  • 2
    @heyheni This is a textbook cartel, wtf. Do they think they're above the law or do they not know highschool economics?
  • 3
    @Nanos They want you to use the frontend, that's how they show you ads. Now if Facebook exposed its user-facing API for $5/mo on an individual basis I'd consider paying that just so I can throw together some highly specific integrations in an afternoon.
  • 4
    @Nanos Free speech isn't in danger in the western world, stop saying that. In Hungary in the past 12 months one government funded oligarch bought up 2 major opposition newspapers and a radio station and closed them, and they're selling frequencies at unpayable prices on purpose so only their stations can survive. There's one independent station that came around in the early 80s and one TV channel that isn't literally owned by high ranking officials in the governing party, the only independent media are online newspapers and blogs.
    This is violation of free speech. Google or Facebook banning nutjobs isn't.
  • 0
    @homo-lorens

    I'm reminded of a social network that does have an API, and also adverts..

    The adverts are to be found in the advert section of the site, and not in the rest of the site. :-)

    This way, when you want to buy a product, you pop into the part of the site with adverts, and have a look, or even ask a vendor questions/etc. in public !

    It works well, I wonder why no one else does that..
  • 1
    @homo-lorens Correction, even this is only a violation of free press, because nobody is getting prosecuted for what they say free speech is still intact.
  • 1
    @Nanos I don't know this social network, what is it called?
  • 0
    @homo-lorens

    And that is the nub of the issue, no ones heard of it, even though its been around for what, 30+ years..

    Sadly its recent change of management, has seen a change in direction from a company that upheld its principles, to one that just listens to whichever group shouts loudest to determine whose side to take.

    And the same bugs still exist 30 years later..

    Apparently uneconomic to fix !

    Which might explain why you haven't heard of it. :-)

    On my todo list to write a new front end client for it, that's also compatible with my own backend..

    Now, if I make the backend and front end freeware..

    Or maybe donationware. :-)
  • 1
    @Nanos I still don't know what you're talking about, but IRC had also been around for a while and yet I only learned about it recently through some FOSS project. (and I still haven't used it ever because I run my own homelab and keep port 80 open which means all large servers block me automatically)

    Anyway, I mean to say that just because some piece of internet tech is old it isn't necessarily well known or mature.
  • 2
    @heyheni
    Texas isn't a reliable dog in that fight. They sue because it's wednesday and they hate california liberals not moving more jobs to texas. They also sued the government over the election results, and tried to force vaccinate 11 year old girls for HPV with a vaccine that was shown to cause blood clot issues in pre-teens, because the government had gotten a fat check from Merck.
  • 1
    Finaly politics have arrived at the digital age!
  • 0
    @homo-lorens

    I find it interesting, and also annoying.. that last time I checked, no one did a really good Windows IRC client.

    I imagine there must be the perfect one on Linux. :-)

    I always had some issue with on Windows IRC software that prevented it working with every IRC server.

    Now, some folk said, it was the server fault..

    And yet some other people could connect with other IRC clients without issue..

    But then those same clients, would play up with another server, that mine was fine with !
  • 0
    @Nanos I suppose you are meant to have 3-4 clients installed.
  • 0
    @homo-lorens

    Then I have to learn 4 different applications..

    Kinda like having 4 different browsers, since not all websites work on all browsers..

    Kinda like, I want just one mobile phone, not a mobile phone and a palmtop PC !

    Or two mobile phones, because an app I want to use, doesn't work on one OS, but will on another OS..

    I can't even find a mug I like, they are either almost perfect, but then float, or not so perfect and sink..

    Someone should make a perfect plastic one, and then fill the gap between the inside and the outside with concrete, then it will sink, in the sink !
  • 2
    No force in universe will stop stupid people doing stupid things. EU should invest more to citizens education instead of regulations. However i support pulling plug on facebook and some of googles practices just because the amount of lobbying they buy and monopoly positions they acquired by doing this.
  • 0
    @Avimelekh I think they just want to undercut monopolistic practices. This is less about protecting the users and more about regulating massive troves of data to cut the self-fueling advantage they mean.
  • 1
    The reality of this still looks a bit different. EU assigned scientists won't break into Google headquarters with their very own Black Ops team and let a Google rep get the search algorithm at gunpoint.

    Companies still can decide simply not to comply and take the fines and since those are enormous they in turn may stifle the quality of their products in the EU.

    While this might help competition, that is not necessarily positive for customers. Such an equivalency is oft brought up, but is plain wrong. An example is Germany and distribution of soccer rights to providers, where this is the favorite sport of most. In order to break up a Sky monopole, it was federally decreed for them to be distributed among providers. Now more providers show games, but customers are fucked. They would now need multiple subscriptions to view all the games they are interested in and could view before.

    Lastly there is likely to be political strife and retaliation - all companies in question are US based.
  • 1
    yeah just got the email from google about this
  • 1
    I do agree with almost everything in this, but the reason behind it from EU side isnt right.

    If you really think about it, it isnt really about doing whats right, its about to earn more money to the union and to cripple/make the states weaker in Europe.

    The EU keeps talking about fair competition, but the reality is most countries in Europe even combined with the other countries in Europe, cant even come close to be a competitor on an even playing field. So the EU has to use economy sections to try to cripple the American tech companies power grab around Europe.

    Also if they care so much about fair competiton and stopping unethical, why are they only punishing tech companies, just look at some of the big copyright lawyer companies and music companies, that has been able to do what ever that wanted for last 1-2 decade, from demanding illegal data from ISP, to spying and to harassing people.
  • 1
    @Frederick On another note that article 13 shit, should have been an eye opener to people. Do you think these democrats really have the interrest in you. Funny enough, i have not seen a single person saying they did support and wanted article 13 and the other copyright bullshit, but funny enough the majority of politicians voting for this crap, with a few expections like Sweden.

    Trusting EU with your freedom, is like trusting Facebook or Google with your privacy.

    But at least if i wanted to protect my privacy, i could avoid using Facebook and google, but its another story if i wanted to protect my freedom if i disagreed with something else from some other countries in EU decided as illegal, then it would be considered breaking a law.
  • 1
    @Frederick It's also a hot topic in the US. Monopolies are bad for everyone.
    Google for example buys small innovative startups automatically with a bot that analyzes the web and the stock market. No human involved. Eliminating potential competition.
    That's not ok.

    Sure the EU was founded as a neoliberal trading block to keep europeans from shooting each other. And a lot is to be wished it was better but the EU improved the lives of millions of people. And now it's Adopting laws to the digital age is a necessity and that's what happening with those two acts.
  • 0
    @heyheni Dont get me i would like to see these big giants go down.

    But i do dislikes governments a bit more. I already dislike how stupid our democracy is in Denmark with all these polticians trying to limit our freedom with their stupid authority view of the world.

    That brings me to the problem with EU, Denmark is already considered to be that country with the least amount of corruption. So why should we have an international government, where my vote doesnt even matter, due to some of the countries with a worst view on freedom and corruption then my own has up to around 7 times the amount of seats in the parliament.

    (I know the seats is counted by the amount of citizens, but if we should use this shitty logic to make the democracy worthless for smaller countries by size, that would basically be the same as if a country gave more votes to the richer and then called it a fair democracy)
  • 0
    @Frederick Also our great system in Denmark was single handed built from the ground by generations.

    Recent laws is affecting our perfect system and making it worst.

    (Just smaller irritations, but example of why i dont think EU makes lives better as a government)
    Their new law about how obtaining holidays works in our country (not bad in itself, just the result of the change) resulted in me losing weeks.

    Also their new law of minimum wage they tried to forced on Denmark would had resulted in how our model was built, would demolish how labor unions works and potentially make the average worker earn less.
  • 1
    @Frederick
    Democracy is, and always will be an exercise in eventual failure.
  • 0
    @Frederick Also i do not trust how one of the biggest member countries of EU, has a history in recent times in their own country where politicians allowing their polices force to beat civilans.

    One example is when firefighters wanted a rise for their dangours work, so they send the police to beat them in the protest.

    Also the same country, now wants to ban filming the police.

    Countries like that with politicians like that, is unworth to lead the democracy and freedom.
  • 0
    @SortOfTested I agree, even the purest and less corrupt governments, will fail the people in the end in right scenario, and thats why the idea of having an union function as an international government is a bad idea.
  • 0
    I see, you haven't much traveled outside of fairy wonder land that is skandinavia right?

    With freedom and wealth comes a responsibility. You have to look at the alternative of not having the EU. Do you want the Bulgarians invading Greece because of poverty? Or "the great system of Denmark" invade Germany?
    Oh wait.... you did 1864 (slesvig) because of hip hip hurrah danish nationalism and hubris. Europeans love to hate each other and wage war.

    The EU prevents that by leveling poverty and giving a forum to talk. Yes that may look like oppression for rich ass danes. Because peace costs.
    But in the bigger picture and with an outlook into the future. Chinas Expansion, Climate Emergency, Human Rights I'm damm happy about the EU. Fordi vi er stærkere sammen kære @Frederick. Aldrig krig igen! 🕊
  • 0
    @heyheni Ohhh that "for the greater good", to justify oppress people´s freedom for a system to make your own life easier. Unlike big companies, its the fault of governments the 2 world wars happen in modern time.

    Changing the EU from a trade union to a government is a mockery of the idea of
    demorocacy.

    Most EU countries would be able to negotiate Climate Emergency, human rights etc as a union as it started to be, back when it was just a trade union.

    Your war talk doesnt really matter at all, since most countries in Europa is member of NATO, so if one member country is attacked, most members will go to war ageinst the attacker or help resolve the conflict. Also EU doesnt have a millitary force and EU members arent required to go to war with the country anyway.

    Unlike what you think, i do only hate governments & politicians of countries and not the countries or their culture.
Add Comment