srrr
Joined 14 years ago
Karma
476
Submissions
73
Member since
Jul 1
Recent submissions
Comment · 3 years ago
The concern is about the Digital Markets Act and not the GDPR.
To quote https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-07-05/meta-won-... :
A number of companies, including Meta, have self-designated themselves as “gatekeepers” under the DMA rules, which will potentially make them subject to stricter regulations around data sharing and giving preference to their own products.
Gatekeepers are banned from combining users’ personal data across different platforms under the DMA.
Threads is designed to let users follow the same accounts they’ve connected with on Instagram and keep their Instagram usernames, helping the social media giant leverage its billions of users to quickly gain scale.
Comment · 3 years ago
While I support almost everything you said there is a national standards body and some standards. See:
1) https://www.fitko.de/ 2) https://www.xoev.de/ 3) https://www.xrepository.de/
Comment · 3 years ago
I think the term gatekeeper makes more sense if applied to companies like Apple, Google, Microsoft & Co, with their search engines, maps, app stores, operating systems, browsers ... all these are gateways to "the digital market". Twitter might be to small and comparatively niche to be classified as a gatekeeper. There does not seem to be an exact definition that I could find. But social networks as a category and companies like Meta/Facebook are listed as gatekeepers.
Comment · 3 years ago
The European Union Digital Markets Act, coming into effect in May 2023, explicitly forbids such behavior. (If twitter is classified as a "gatekeeper".)
https://commission.europa.eu/strategy-and-policy/priorities-...
Example of the “don'ts” - Gatekeeper platforms may no longer:
- treat services and products offered by the gatekeeper itself more favourably in ranking than similar services or products offered by third parties on the gatekeeper's platform
- prevent consumers from linking up to businesses outside their platforms
Comment · 4 years ago
Our world in data has a nice graph showing some countries that where able to decouple CO2 emission from GDP growth showing that this is indeed possible: https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/consumption-co2-per-capit...
And I am totally for these "million other lefty-green things". Solar and wind is comparatively cheap to install and comparatively low effect on nature. The resulting energy is also cheap (if used locally). We have many (poor) villages here in Germany owning their own wind turbines and benefiting from selling this energy, greatly improving the financial situation for the local population. It's like farming but with wind turbines.
In the long run Germany will be better of. We just have to get through this painful transition.
Comment · 4 years ago
SBC and aptX have the same quality (at the same bit rate). You are most likely talking about SBC XQ and aptX HD: http://soundexpert.org/articles/-/blogs/audio-quality-of-sbc... & https://habr.com/en/post/456182/
Comment · 4 years ago
I don't find the argument "richer countries can emit more CO2" to be helpful. The richer the country the more money is available to act responsible.
Even in your GDP adjusted data France is 37% lower than Germany (0.14/0.09). In a global comparison both countries are doing fine, but not good enough: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/ .
Comment · 4 years ago
Some data: Per capita CO2 emissions in France are half than in Germany: https://ourworldindata.org/co2/country/germany?country=DEU~F...
(ps: I am an opponent of nuclear energy. But facts are facts.)
Comment · 4 years ago
A German court can not, in fact, serve a court order to Volkswagen America. (Technically it can, but the order is not enforceable.) A German court is also forbidden to force Volkswagen AG to reach into Volkswagen America because these are separate legal entities.
A German court would use judicial assistance and ask US law enforcement to help. US law enforcement would then adhere to local laws and protect the rights of US citizens while trying to help.
This is named Mutual legal assistance: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutual_legal_assistance_treaty .
Comment · 4 years ago
Searching for "12.1 Regions. Customer can specify the location(s) where Customer Data will be processed within the" (as mentioned in the verdict) yields AWS as the problematic sub-processor for company A: https://d1.awsstatic.com/legal/aws-gdpr/AWS_GDPR_DPA.pdf
Comment · 4 years ago
summary (English): https://gdprhub.eu/index.php?title=VK_Baden-W%C3%BCrttemburg...
news article (German): https://www.golem.de/news/vergabekammer-clouddienste-von-us-...
primary source (German): https://rewis.io/s/u/PjK/
press statement of law firm (German): https://gruendelpartner.de/newsroom/gruendelpartner-erwirkt-...
Comment · 4 years ago
No, opening a connection and exchanging IPs falls under "technically necessary" processing of personal data.
But from a legal point of view we, as a European company, are forbidden to use any US infrastructure provider. We can't ask for consent to transfer data to an US based entity if our consent form itself is already hosted by an US based entity. And even if we did find a solution, like hosting the main infrastructure with a European company and asking for consent for some later data transfer, we are most likely forbidden to transfer data to US based entities at all.
From what my lawyer told me the ruling from https://noyb.eu/en/austrian-dsb-eu-us-data-transfers-google-... applies to all services from AWS, Google Cloud, ...
There will be many rulings that follow. Everybody is just waiting for the Irish Data Protection Commission to actually do its work, but the Irish DPC does not seem to be much in favor of data protection: https://noyb.eu/en/irish-dpc-handles-9993-gdpr-complaints-wi... & https://bigbrotherawards.de/en/2022/lifetime-achievement-iri...
This will change soon. From what I heard work is underway to let national data protection offices handle cases without the Irish DPC or force the Irish CPC to work.
Comment · 4 years ago
To add: The reason why US companies can't be GDPR complaint is because of Article 5 and the conflict with the Cloud Act: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... (paragraph f)
"(1) Personal data shall be: (f) processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data, including protection against unauthorised or unlawful processing and against accidental loss, destruction or damage, using appropriate technical or organisational measures (‘integrity and confidentiality’)."
See also Schrems II: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems#Schrems_II
Comment · 4 years ago
From what I understand the legal exception to process personal data without consent is written down in Article 6 https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... (paragraph b)
"(1) Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies: (b) processing is necessary for the performance of a contract to which the data subject is party or in order to take steps at the request of the data subject prior to entering into a contract;"
This is ok for GDPR complaint data processors. The reason why US companies can't be GDPR complaint is because of Article 5 and the conflict with the Cloud Act: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL... (paragraph f)
"(1) Personal data shall be: (f) processed in a manner that ensures appropriate security of the personal data, including protection against unauthorised or unlawful processing and against accidental loss, destruction or damage, using appropriate technical or organisational measures (‘integrity and confidentiality’)."
See also Schrems II: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Max_Schrems#Schrems_II
It doesn't even matter if you asked for consent or have other reasons to process the data (Article 6) if you are not complying with Article 5.
[email protected]