Such a corporate stooge.
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2024
252 points (99.2% liked)
Technology
4414 readers
429 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.
Post guidelines
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post 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 communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone 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 attacks
Any 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 tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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.
He's a liberal capitalist stooge. All of his decent-to-good policies are social, and virtually every financial or corporate decision is dogshit.
Yes. But God forbid anyone realizing someone can be socially left and economically right, or vice versa.
It's not that he can't be that, it's that it makes him a tool.
I mean, at what point do we stop stating the obvious and focus on what is occulted?
When people realize you can do both.
Apparently not. At any rate, the horse has been dead so long, all that's left are sun-bleached bones.
Bones are long gone. All you got now is sand.
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.
I didn't say that.
He’s always been surrounded by the wealthy and well-connected, and that’s who he listens to.
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.
Damn. Fuck money.
Just depends on how big the ~~bribe~~ lobbying effort is.
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.
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.
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!”
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:
- exist
- be a setting
- that people interact with through the operating system
- Be reasonably easy to locate and change
idk guys, seems pretty difficult to me /s
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.
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
Only in the EU, where people matter more than money.
my first thought is "hell yeah! it should be opt in" then I opened comments and... shit.
I’m surprised this asshole has time to veto good bills between his sessions of destroying destitute people’s possessions.
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.
Hopefully a better person wins the primary.
It's not even opt-in wtf Gavin...
deleted by creator
What are the chances the state legislature overrides the veto?
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.
They are only pro-consumer when it doesn't evolve Big Tech. They are owned by Big Tech...
Why can he veto?
Because he is the governor? If it goes back to the state legislators and gets a super majority it can become law
Ok, i rephrase. Why can the governor veto?
Imagine, if a Kanton could veto in an Abstimmung.
...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.