wtfstatists

You have very restricted definition of market. Market != Stock Market. Slap of market does not mean you go down, it means the profits goes to your compititors. Rise of China is textbook example here. China made the bank, while everyone who did not have compititive labor regulations got slapped for it. Globalisation basically means States getting slapped for not being competitive.

There are whole categories of companies/products (OVH/ProtonMail/etc) due to NSA. So yes USA got slapped for it too just not as visible as Rise-of-China.

Its not just US vs China. Its US vs Market. Its the hand of market that US need to watch out for. Everytime a powerful entity acts like a madman, it gets weaker. Soon or later it will receive 1000th cut which may be one too many.

Today US became less reliable.

Now thats a moral argument. In a realpolitikal world, X aggresses against Y because its in X's self interest, not because Y have been bad. Under this model, China _is_ suffering from aggressions just not from Apple/etc.

No Canada is arresting on behalf of US. On the contrary, Huawei is building 5g infra for Canada.

> Violating sanctions is a criminal offense under U.S. and Canadian law.

Just because its legal does not mean there wont be an aggressive reaction[1]. China will probably respond with force. Huawei with market exit. Then there are other actors who would respond in there own way we would never know about. US probably going to take net-hurt from this.

Do you want to hurt US market/USD ? Because thats what use of your justifications will do.

[1] edit: By that I mean non-US actors have not agreed to react aggressively. Legal implies that only US persons have.

> Huawei stole a Canadian company's technology

Then Canada gets to do the arresting and jailing.

Re next 2 points: If you want to justify violance you need stronger triggers. Those 2 just give the US right to ban the Huawei from country or using the USD.

This looks like US doing it because it can. But then US is not facing USSR whose going to die from self-inflicted wounds. China have the most capitalist companies (Apple/etc) defending it.

Safety/Quality regulations reduces choices and quantity. This hits poor the most, as they can no longer buy inferior but cheap products and services. See China.

Instead regulations should be focus on reducing scam and misleading offerings. If someone wants to buy/use despite knowing the risks, let him.

I am more refering to the css. All content is fetched without needing js. But its css hidden because ...

    <noscript>
        <style type="text/css">main {display: none;}</style>
        <ul class="list" style="color: white;">
            <li>
                <p class="center">You donve Javascript enabled. Good luck with that.</p>
            </li>
        </ul>
    </noscript>

Wow. Going out of the way to annoy js blockers.

> I certainly wouldn't want a social media company to make money from it being shared

Reddit/etc make money because of their platform not content. All of the content on reddit is available via api for free. So its definitely not the content.

You are basically normalizing violent response to a non-violent action. US can do that because FB is US company. UK cannot just because you happen to visit.

Please realize that other states are taking notes at this situation. They are waiting for US/UK/etc exec to visit and make the same excuse.

Oh I did not realize FB was pointing gun at people.

> I mean if this loophole is available to extremely well off individuals and companies why not for services...

No you have to move at the very least.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-6363371/Wall-Street...

https://www.capitalism.com/taxes-in-puerto-rico/

WW1 was monarchies (professional war-makers) still thinking war-making a major wealth gaining activity. 100 years ago they were proven horribly wrong, and ultimately triggered their extinction. After WW1, world learned that industrial activity had taken the crown from war-making. This brought WW2, socialism and democracy to world scene.

But within next decade world would realize that democrats/socialists are temporary elites filling the vacuum created by the global transition from monarchy to technocracy. This is why there will not be a WW3. Because those who are competent enought to make big money, are making it in tech. There will also not be a global resource war because such mega needs are $$$ opportunity, you can bet there are future-$$$onaires working at this problem this very second.

But without the IPMI kernel modules loaded, IPMI is harmless, right ?

Absolutely. Though nomad lifestyle isnt really for me. Malta has a cool residency program [1]: pay only $15k/yr + territorial tax and live and work from there. Georgia is a good and cheaper option, a more natural and open country but not as developed (developing very fast though). Best thing is ease of getting residency, if you can afford it you will get it. No artificial barrier. So can bring your employees from all over the world and open an office.

So yeah not paying $20+k/yr to any goverment either. The moment I hit that I am out.

[1] https://www.ccmalta.com/publications/malta-global-residence-...

There is no extradition in civil offences. For example extradition under Europe Arrest Warrant require criminal offence carrying maximum panelty of >=1 year [1].

GDPR only fines and sanctions. Dont hold EU assets and you would be ok.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/European_Arrest_Warrant

If the group does not have enough consensus on what mission is or what is in service of the mission, then group cannot advance anywhere and can only be disbanded.

Meritocracy means your elevation within a group is not influenced by your ancestory, wealth, socail status, who are your friends with, how much you were/are-being oppressed, charisma or twitter followers.

The group has a mission. You help with mission, you go up. You work against the mission, you go down. Thats meritocracy.

Nah its just stupid programming from Google. You will spook GMail if you try to access from different country. It will lock you out. Good luck trying to remember details about your decade old email account.

You thought knowing and maintaing strong password is enough to guarantee access. Well Google disagrees with you.

IP is not a user-entered data and cannot be freely selected, unlike email addresses.

> the fact that your email isn't yourname@mailprovider.com doesn't make it any less identifiable.

The only official guidelines about email I could find are in here [1]. It does not say all email addresses are PII. It just says "name.surname@company.com" type addresses are PII and "info@company.com" type addresses are NOT PII. So even "yourname@mailprovider.com" may be non-PII.

> someone can use it to identify additional information about you such as if you are subscribed to a specific service or not.

Thats not enough. The service need to have PII. That is, if none of the services has PII, the email address is not PII.

> you can't ask users to make a throwaway email account

Throwaway is not needed. At best an individual need 2 email accounts. One address for the services where he is identified (eg bank website) and one address for where he is not (eg random forum).

So this is not an onerous condition at all. If thats the case you are making.

> If the website asks for an email address that is PII under the GDPR.

This is not a (official) citation.

[1] https://ec.europa.eu/info/law/law-topic/data-protection/refo...

Ok here is my email: 1373f84998986cf8@tutanota.com. Identify me! Know that I wont used the email elsewhere.

> You cannot use ToU to bypass GDPR.

Just to clarify this is not buried in ToU but laid out clearly.

So the website says dont give PII. User still does. And GDPR would penalize the website ? Citation please.

> ToU don’t change what PII is or isn’t under the GDPR.

ToU can by prohibiting user from entering any PII. In case of email, ToU would say that only non-identifying email can be used.

For the rest of your comment, I dont see any relevance here. There is no need for consent for non-PII userdata. All PII userdata is behind legal and technical wall and cannot be accessed by the processor/controller of non-PII userdata.

I like this definiton better. IANAL Warning.

Personal Data:

  - PII is Personal Data.

  - If a user has PII, then all of the userdata is Personal Data.

So HN posts would not be Personal Data for the users that have email field empty. And even email (and any other user-entered data) can be made non-PII if ToU explicitly required to be so.

My advice would be to legally and technically isolate PII and other_userdata. GDPR/etc compliance become quite easier this way.

There is nothing you have said that a business who can potentially be fined to death, rely upon.

The fact that every response to the criticism of GDPR being too ambiguous, is ambiguous, only proves critics right. EU lawmakers picked worst combination: huge fine + huge ambiguity. This all could have been done with more certainity. So sad.

This argument can be used to justify any form of government as long as some share of extortions get invested for the benefit of extorted.

But I agree all of this is great if I only have to pay <$5K yearly but not so much otherwise. Not to mention having to emigrate to cancel "the services". That sucks too.

The States killed those people not Ashley-Madison.

Sadly this is illegal in EU. You have to offer both Free+ClassD and Free+ClassA versions otherwise its forced consent.

I have written more about this here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16351892

No its location of server that did it for Megaupload.

https://www.plagiarismtoday.com/2015/12/28/extradition-juris...

In short, much of Megaupload’s servers were located in the U.S. This, for the purpose of jurisdiction, means two things. First, much of the alleged crimes took place physically in the United States. The infringements, the payments, etc. took place, at least in large part, in Virginia even if the people orchestrating it were scattered all over the world.

More importantly though, courts in both the U.S. and now New Zealand have ruled that these servers provide sufficient contact with the U.S. to give it jurisdiction over the criminal case. While jurisdiction alone doesn’t mean a person can be extradited, it’s a crucial step and this also explains why a man who never set foot in the U.S. can be extradited to it for a crime committed online.

However, this isn’t the first time the U.S. has used the server argument it’s been using it for years to combat securities fraud in the country.

At least CJEU has ruled that austrian company running uk-hosted website is liable for damages due to copyright infringements occuring in france [1].

http://copyrightblog.kluweriplaw.com/2015/02/11/cjeu-mere-ac...

What are you going to do when decentralization/encryption/etc itself become illegal ?