this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
252 points (99.2% liked)

Technology

1373 readers
156 users here now

Which posts fit here?

Anything that is at least tangentially connected to the technology, social media platforms, informational technologies and tech policy.


Rules

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original linkPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

[email protected]
[email protected]


Icon attribution | Banner attribution

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Gavin Newsom said he opposes mandate on mobile operating system developers.

all 41 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 101 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 month ago (4 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 57 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 14 points 1 month ago (2 children)

Yes. But God forbid anyone realizing someone can be socially left and economically right, or vice versa.

[–] [email protected] 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's not that he can't be that, it's that it makes him a tool.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I mean, at what point do we stop stating the obvious and focus on what is occulted?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

When people realize you can do both.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Apparently not. At any rate, the horse has been dead so long, all that's left are sun-bleached bones.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

Bones are long gone. All you got now is sand.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

You don't have to be economically left to recognize that what corporations have been doing for 30+ years now is an egregious privacy violation and antithesis to our constitutional ideology.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago

I didn't say that.

[–] [email protected] 31 points 1 month ago (2 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago

I mean yeah we've been talking about the issues with capitalism for over 100 years, it excels at keeping things just tolerable enough for the working class that we don't take heads

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

When he got caught breaking his state's own Covid restrictions at French Laundry, the fanciest of wait list fancies in Napa wine country, it's all you needed to know.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago

Just depends on how big the ~~bribe~~ lobbying effort is.

[–] [email protected] 67 points 1 month ago (5 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 1 month ago (1 children)

What a fucking weasly excuse. Fuck this dude.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

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

Source: 15 years as a software engineer

[–] [email protected] 5 points 1 month ago (1 children)

I think he's talking about Do Not Track? That's a signal that's been in web browsers for over a decade now, but because of a lack of legal enforcement has largely been ignored by websites. To my knowledge, there's no equivalent signal in Windows, macOS, or Linux. Though none of that stops individual app developers from putting in a setting into their app's settings/preferences. And heck, the bill only required it to be opt-out, so in reality it would hardly have any impact on their bottom line, thanks to the tyranny of the default.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago

Not to mention: the government imposes onerous regulations on companies and entire industries all the damn time. Claiming “but it’s harrrrrddddddd :(“ is fucking stupid. This is computer science. Figure it out. We’re not paid as much as we are for our health. It’s because we solve hard problems. It meets the standards with its code or else it gets the hose again.

Source: also worked several years in aerospace; currently working in biotech.

[–] [email protected] 13 points 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.

[–] [email protected] 9 points 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!”

[–] [email protected] 6 points 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

[–] [email protected] 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

It'd be great if the decision 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.

[–] [email protected] 39 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

vetoing this is disappointing to say the least and

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

[–] [email protected] 10 points 1 month ago

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

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

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 month ago

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

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

It's not even opt-in wtf Gavin...

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

deleted by creator

[–] [email protected] 12 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

Hopefully a better person wins the primary.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (1 children)

Wait, I thought 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.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

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

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago

What are the chances the state legislature overrides the veto?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)
[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 month ago (1 children)

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

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Ok, i rephrase. Why can the governor veto?

Imagine, if a Kanton could veto in an Abstimmung.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 month ago

...because that's the job of the governor. They are the head of the executive branch of the state. You you have the balance of power between the executive, legislative and judicial.