Archived link

Opinionated article by Alexander Hanff, a computer scientist and privacy technologist who helped develop Europe’s GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation) and ePrivacy rules.

We cannot allow Big Tech to continue to ignore our fundamental human rights. Had such an approach been taken 25 years ago in relation to privacy and data protection, arguably we would not have the situation we have to today, where some platforms routinely ignore their legal obligations at the detriment of society.

Legislators did not understand the impact of weak laws or weak enforcement 25 years ago, but we have enough hindsight now to ensure we don’t make the same mistakes moving forward. The time to regulate unlawful AI training is now, and we must learn from mistakes past to ensure that we provide effective deterrents and consequences to such ubiquitous law breaking in the future.

  • Pickle_Jr@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s more like “Slapping on the wrist isn’t helping.” The Alex Jones bankruptcy is the first time I’ve seen anyone fined significantly to the point of it mattering. Fines are meant to be significant enough that the company would do its best to avoid them. If the fine is palpable, then it’s just the cost of doing business.

    • tuhriel@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      1 day ago

      Yes the fines are not high enough. IMHO there should be two payments: a return of all earnings which are related to the violation PLUS a hefty fine and/or jail for the executives

      That’s the only way it isn’t cost efficient for the big companies to ignore the laws. Also, make sure the fines are actually paid in full and in a reasonable amount of time

    • P03 Locke@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      20
      ·
      edit-2
      2 days ago

      The Alex Jones bankruptcy is the first time I’ve seen anyone fined significantly to the point of it mattering.

      The Alex Jones case is a textbook example of what happens when a rich person is so overconfident that he does even less than the absolute bare minimum to defend himself in a court case. He defaulted on the case! That’s the absolute zero of stupidity in legal terms.

      I don’t really consider the Alex Jones case to be a win. It was a fluke, and if he had even put up a slight bit of effort, it would have turned out very differently. You know, like 99% of the other cases where the rich is legally attacking the poor.

    • PaddleMaster@beehaw.org
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      2 days ago

      I’d argue Alex Jones is completely different in the eyes of the law. His Sandy Hook case and subsequent bankruptcy are very different than the fines levied against tech companies. Which is why there’s a huge difference. In general, crimes that done physically hurt people have less consequences. And that should change. Fining these companies a significant amount, so that they can no longer be considered a line item on the budget would be a good start. There definitely needs to be a change. But I’m no expert to truly evaluate what changes would be effective.