Hacker News Reader

Making it more specific only invites malicious compliance. If businesses TRULY make a good faith effort, they’ve got nothing to worry about.

View on HN

What does malicious compliance mean to you? I've heard it used, but never in a way that makes sense in this context. If they had examples, it would be clearer what the intent was, and businesses would be able to be held the appropriate standard. As it stands, I can't figure out if many of the businesses I deal with are in compliance, and anyone who claims to know is naive, or simply hasn't read the rule closely.

Complying in a way that follows the letter of the law, while clearly contradicting the intent.

For example, finding a loophole to keep it difficult unsubscribe. Or making it easy to unsubscribe, but adding an egregious cancellation fee to all subscriptions.

Another good example is when NYC passed minimum pay laws for delivery drivers, and the big delivery companies immediately all colluded to hide the normal tip screen behind a bunch of submenus (until eventually forced to change it back).

Is it really unclear to you what the intent is here? What specifically about the rule do you think is ambiguous?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com