The year is 2019 and I can’t buy a good majority of consumer technology because we lack privacy legislation and consumer protections. Example: it’s absurd that my TV came with spyware that can’t be turned off or avoided; I had to stop it from phoning home at the network level. It also came with an arbitration clause and a clause waiving the right to a class action lawsuit.

@retrohacker
i think the problem is not lack of legislation. the tech monopoly of big corps exists because people bought it. they sold their privacy for convenience and trendy blinking lights. furthermore, it is impossible for lawmakers to understand new technologies and to do specific laws for each new tech trap and it is impossible to stop the stupidity from people with the "it is ok, i have nothing to hide" mindset.

@hansbauer @retrohacker nope, actually, it's the lack of legislation.

We don't expect people to be experts in chemistry and food safety in order for them not to get poisoned by food they buy. This is called food safety standards.

And yet we expect people will become tech and legal experts, reading through endless EULAs and understanding the fine print, and then being able to verify the tech behind it, for them to be able to protect their basic privacy?

Bollocks.

@hansbauer @retrohacker legislators were able to create food safety standards that make getting poisoned by store-bought food impossibly unlikely. They were able to create regulations around medicines that make it highly unlikely for people to get poisoned by actual, you know, poisons (every medicine is poison in the right amount).

We can, and should, expect legislators to step in and regulate the IT industry.

Market will not solve it.

@rysiek
software is different from food, chemicals, medicine. these can immediately kill or cause great harm. even so, just the most clear and obvious cases came into legislation. dangerous compounds are still being added to food and water, harmful medicines are still being sold etc. legislation did not really solved this problem.
@retrohacker

@hansbauer @retrohacker tell me again how this can't immediately kill or couse great harm:
wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remo

And then tell me how the above is not an obvious case that should come into legislation?

By saying "legislation did not solve the food and water safety issues" are you saying it's completely useless? Or can we agree that it did improve food and water safety measurably and in a very concrete way?

@rysiek
well it was not an issue before 2016 or so. this is what i mean. it will be only something when it is too obvious. furthermore this is some completely different problem from what was being discussed legislators gave only shitty responses to it.
@retrohacker

@hansbauer @retrohacker what was not an issue? Software/hardware that can kill people if buggy? Try about 1985 instead: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Therac-2

I would still like answers to my two questions. they are pretty simple questions, here, for your convenience let me repeat them:
1. how is bad software/hardware not able to do immediate harm?
2. are food and water safety standards useless or not?

Follow

@rysiek
>how is bad software/hardware not able to do immediate harm?
i was talking about privacy issues, tracking software embedded in electronics. you tried to change the subject to self driving cars and what not. i was not having a general discussion.
>are food and water safety standards useless or not?
never said that. said it becomes effective in obvious cases, just after something big happened.
@retrohacker

@hansbauer @retrohacker

Okay, can we then agree we should have legislation that covers obvious cases where IT crappiness can physically harm people, and that such regulation can improve things?

Sign in to participate in the conversation
Fosstodon

Fosstodon is a Mastodon instance that is open to anyone who is interested in technology; particularly free & open source software.