Calif. Governor vetoes bill requiring opt-out signals for sale of user data

Comments

• marine_mustang@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Such a corporate stooge.

  source

  • TachyonTele@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    The guy is so strange. I’ll see great decisions from him for months, and then it’s like he goes into a dungeon and randomly approves the opposite type of laws for awhile.

    Chaotic.

    source

    • Ledivin@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      He’s a liberal capitalist stooge. All of his decent-to-good policies are social, and virtually every financial or corporate decision is dogshit.

      source
    • marine_mustang@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      He’s always been surrounded by the wealthy and well-connected, and that’s who he listens to.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
    • Anticorp@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Just depends on how big the bribe lobbying effort is.

      source
• spankmonkey@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  But Newsom said he is opposed to the new bill’s mandate on operating systems. “I am concerned, however, about placing a mandate on operating system (OS) developers at this time,” the governor wrote. “No major mobile OS incorporates an option for an opt-out signal. By contrast, most Internet browsers either include such an option or, if users choose, they can download a plug-in with the same functionality. To ensure the ongoing usability of mobile devices, it’s best if design questions are first addressed by developers, rather than by regulators. For this reason, I cannot sign this bill.”

  Oh fuck off Newsom.

  source

  • penquin@lemm.ee ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    What a fucking weasly excuse. Fuck this dude.

    source

    • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      It’s also categorical bullshit in terms of technical accuracy.

      source

      • -> View More Comments
  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    He’s trying to sound like he knows what he’s talking about in nuanced detail. But his comment makes it very obvious that he has no idea what the fuck he’s talking about.

    source
  • Zink@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    That sounds a lot like the legislature passed a bill because the people can’t trust companies to do the right thing, and Newsom said “we should trust the companies to do the right thing!”

    source
  • Not_mikey@slrpnk.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    It’d be great if it was made by developers, they’d probably implement it since they can benefit from it as well. It’s not the developers making these decisions though, it’s the companies who have a vested interest in selling your data that are.

    source
  • morrowind@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Here’s the extent of the design constraints by the bill:

    (b) (1) A business shall not develop or maintain a mobile operating system that does not include a setting that enables a consumer to send an opt-out preference signal to businesses with which the consumer interacts through the mobile operating system.

    (2) This subdivision shall become operative six months after the adoption of regulations by the California Privacy Protection Agency that outline the requirements and technical specifications for an opt-out preference signal to be used by a mobile operating system.

    (c) The California Privacy Protection Agency may adopt regulations as necessary to implement and administer this section, including, but not limited to, ensuring that the setting described by subdivision (a) is easy for a reasonable person to locate and configure and updating the definitions of “browser” and “mobile operating system” to address changes in technology, data collection, obstacles to implementation, or privacy concerns.

    It has to:

    1. exist
    2. be a setting
    3. that people interact with through the operating system
    4. Be reasonably easy to locate and change

    ---

    idk guys, seems pretty difficult to me /s

    source
• recursive_recursion@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  should be the other way around;
  users should be asked first if they’d like to opt-in

  source

  • Anticorp@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Only in the EU, where people matter more than money.

    source
  • TriflingToad@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    my first thought is “hell yeah! it should be opt in” then I opened comments and… shit.

    source
• YtA4QCam2A9j7EfTgHrH@infosec.pub ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I’m surprised this asshole has time to veto good bills between his sessions of destroying destitute people’s possessions.

  source
• alquicksilver@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  I voted for this guy before and thought I’d continue to do so, but the crap he’s been pulling recently-ish has just confirmed for me he won’t ever get my vote again. What a jagoff.

  source

  • Reptorian@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Hopefully a better person wins the primary.

    source
• untorquer@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  It’s not even opt-in wtf Gavin…

  source
• hexaflexagonbear@hexbear.net ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  The states GDP would probably plummet if phone OS developers couldn’t sell user data lol

  source
• Turd_Ferg@sh.itjust.works ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Wait, I though cali was best when it came to consumer rights. This is a strange divergence. I had to re-read the title because I thought surely the state would be on the side of opt’ing in to the sale of user’s data.

  source

  • BrikoX@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    They are only pro-consumer when it doesn’t evolve Big Tech. They are owned by Big Tech…

    source
• Jayve@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  What are the chances the state legislature overrides the veto?

  source
• MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

  Why can he veto?

  source

  • possiblylinux127@lemmy.zip ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

    Because he is the governor? If it goes back to the state legislators and gets a super majority it can become law

    source

    • MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml ⁨1⁩ ⁨month⁩ ago

      Ok, i rephrase. Why can the governor veto?

      Imagine, if a Kanton could veto in an Abstimmung.

      source

      • -> View More Comments