Linked by Thom Holwerda on Fri 25th May 2018 20:23 UTC

This article is terrible, and clearly chooses sides with advertisers and data harvesters over users - not surprising, coming from Bloomberg.

For some of America's biggest newspapers and online services, it's easier to block half a billion people from accessing your product than comply with Europe's new General Data Protection Regulation.

The Los Angeles Times, the Chicago Tribune, and The New York Daily News are just some telling visitors that, "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries."

With about 500 million people living in the European Union, that's a hard ban on one-and-a-half times the population of the U.S.

Blanket blocking EU internet connections - which will include any U.S. citizens visiting Europe - isn't limited to newspapers. Popular read-it-later service Instapaper says on its website that it's "temporarily unavailable for residents in Europe as we continue to make changes in light of the General Data Protection Regulation."

Whenever a site blocks EU users, you can safely assume they got caught with their hands in the user data cookie jar. Some of these sites have dozens and dozens of trackers from dozens of different advertisement companies, so the real issue here is even these sites themselves simply have no clue to whom they're shipping off your data - hence making it impossible to comply with the GDPR in the first place.

The GDPR is not only already forcing companies to give insight into the data they collect on you - it's also highlighting those that simply don't care about your privacy. It's amazing how well GDPR is working, and it's only been in effect for one day.

Permalink for comment 657460
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

"I am a little surprised that so few people are opposing this bill.

Perhaps because there actually are people in favor of this regulation.
Europeans may like it, but it's written in a way consistent with EU culture - the committee knows best, etc, and drips with the European Arrogance mentality too.

Those opposed are outside the EU and as a result have little to now sway over any EU law, etc.

"I also find it insulting that the EU thinks their laws should be enforced in the US.

Total bullshit. Everyone must obey the laws where they operate. If these companies want to be global, they have to obey local laws. They could have made the decision decades ago to purely operate in the US market if they wanted.
The problem with the GDPR, however, is that it is written to apply to any EU Citizen regardless of where they are.

So if you have an EU Citizen visit the another country and access a website while in that country and the website is in compliance with that country's laws but not the GDPR then the EU Citizen could get the EU to go after that website.

IOW, the GDPR is written in a way to force the European view and law on everyone without particular attention to jurisdiction, locality, etc.

"I don't think claiming compliance indicates anything, and I'm curious how many companies just lied because they couldn't afford to operate if they did.

If they knowingly lie about compliance, I hope they get caught, fined out of existence and leave room for a more ethical competitor who has gotten its shit together.

Do we really want the most amoral companies to win over the competition on the market merely because they are amoral? I'd rather pay a little more, knowing that this company do more than just provide the cheapest service/products at the expense of privacy/environment/job conditions/etc.

There is no such thing as complete 100% GDPR compliance because such compliance is impossible.
The question is not are you compliant, but how non-compliant are you? Right now, folks are just trying to show a best effort towards being theoretically compliant against what is currently known; but once you introduce a third-party integration (f.e GitHub, JIRA, etc) compliance goes out the window with no hope of return.

Reply Parent Score: -1