German cartel watchdog objects to the way Google processes user data Google users don't have enough choice over whether – and to what extent – they agree to "far-reaching processing of their data across services," Germany's competition regulator says, adding that the tech giant should change its "data processing" terms and practices. "The choices offered so far, if any, are, in particular, not …
At least they care about privacy.
I doubt that the UK government will do much, especially seeing how they are giving Plantir all of our medical data.
What needs to be added is how google sucks up personal data via google-analytics javascript that is embedded in many web sites. Users are not told about this let alone given the opportunity to opt out.
The "our website uses cookies" has not been legal since 2019, if the site does more than basic 1st party cookies for keeping the session active and noting where the visitor currently is.
If the site does more than that, it has to offer the ability to reject all (non-essential*) cookies, accept all cookies, or to select which cookies they want. Also, rejecting all cookies cannot be harder than accepting all cookies (i.e. if accept is 1 click, reject must also be 1 click).
* essential cookies include a cookie to say the user has rejected cookies, so you don't have to ask them every time they visit, as are cookies like breadcrumb cookies to allow the user to backtrack their movements.
Actually, as this is the monopolies commission intervening concerned about the use of personal data to gain an unfair advantage in the market. Some of the DMA is pure protectionism but this is a very reasonable approach: in some situations (eg. holiday booking) the data slurpers may be considered to have the kind of advantage that some market makers have on the stockmarket.
therefore it's just jealousy and naked protectionism.
Nope, a bit of historic knowledge would look good on you. As it says in the piece:
German residents are deeply opposed to sharing their personal data, for obvious historic reasons, and are suspicious of anything that looks like surveillance.
...
Like IBM helping Nazis out and having no issues selling the tools indexing Jews, Roma, Sinti, Slavs and other non Arian races, mentally disabled, political undesirables and so on, so they can be exterminated. Or living in a society where you can't fart without the Stasi making a note of it and judging its political orientation. I personally can't recommend the latter situation.
Furthermore, if you allow me a personal observation: I see you quote "great" companies that on the whole do nothing more than monetise. Take somebody elses "invention" and just suck it dry to the extreme. If that is the definition of making you great, I do feel sorry for you...
Whilst true, it was mainly for control of a population (hence the 'concentration' bit), we didn't turn them into camps for exterminating while races.
And for all our sins there's plenty of times where we weren't the bad guys (like stopping the old Indian tradition of adding wife's to a funeral pyre).
Look long enough at a people's history and no-one's society is clean, unblemished and without horrors unleashed on others.
So with that out of the way... Good on Germany for taking a stand, let's hope they follow through in a way that benefits all.
"Erdloch" here obviously being "Arschloch" incorrectly autocorrected.
I will leave the translation to the reader..
Funny observation:
German cussing tends to be focused on the rectum and its efflusions.
Norwegian cussing tends to be blasphemic
Dutch cussing often goes for diseases and also for genitals
British cussing? I am not sure.. my impression is that it tends to go for quantity over quality.
Any further observations?
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
