How the EU is Taking on Tech Giants

[@ArgumentativeAtheist]

This is going to kill Facebook's current business model in the EU. Which can only be a good thing.

[@kmeanxneth]

maybe youtube's bad copyright too

[@ArgumentativeAtheist]

@@kmeanxneth it should definitely improve their terms or service. Maybe the way that they enforce things as well.

[@thelegitidiot9391]

*In the US at 4 AM in the morning* "Babe wake up new TLDR just dropped"

[@aoeuable]

Those buzzword statements are actually important: While of course hopelessly general they convey the intention of the laws and thus help courts (and others) interpret the more detailed sections so that the letter of the law can't be abused to work against the spirit of the law as any interpretation going against them automatically becomes invalid.

[@paul1979uk2000]

True, buzzwords might seem useless but it's a statement of intent and the public seems to respond to that a lot more than jargon.

[@MaximusLight]

That is one thing I wish people would note more often, it's true that buzzwords don't help make laws but living in North America, oh boy do I ever wish there was a line put in called "intention" so people couldn't get away with various forms of abuse.

[@angelavalencia8294]

EU: our firend hero twitter free and free facebook back

[@lp9280]

It is not fight "against" big tech, it is just treating everyone equal by the law. It is clear and obvious that big tech abuses their position and consumers simply cannot choose. There is plenty of anti-completive behaviour which is never good for consumer. To say it is against tech companies, it is like gangster saying "wtf I was able to extort people before and now law forbids me doing it". In simple terms protecting consumer is not the same as working against big tech, if they don't break the laws they won't have issues.

[@bazzfromthebackground3696]

When the company makes it's money using only predatory methods, it is a fight "against." Because it is, and will always be, Big Tech versus the general populace. Big Tech is only concerned with what they can gain monetarily, at the expense of their consumers.

[@lp9280]

@@bazzfromthebackground3696 So you just basically said the same thing that I did, however my point is that for it to be fight "against" it has to be partial. Like there is one opinion, and there is opposing opinion, and then "fight" is for benefit of one of the sides. In this case It does not benefits EU commission, both sides knows that big tech strategies are predatory and anti-consumer and they only exists because of outdated laws which could be circumvented. EU simply put new laws which addresses that, they are not "against" anybody who does not try to abuse the consumers. Let's use analogy - I put the fence around my house. Somebody came and hit the fence with their head. Does that means I build the wall to fight "against" intruders, or I simply build the wall around my house, because it is my house and I like it to be fenced off. Realistically the fence is not directly "against" anyone who does not try to intrude, for most reasonable people there was no reason to trespass anyway. I mean fair enough - I am nit-picking on the language, but I just don't like this narrative of EU being some sort of aggressive organisation (be it for consumer protection) . The laws they are making are simply common-sense laws which were not there because of technology and internet changed quicker than the laws. They are not against anyone, they simply closing loopholes of predatory and exploitative business tactics, which should not have existed, but does because there was power vacuum, especially in the US where exploitation of the weaker is almost culturally accepted.

[@nct948]

@@lp9280 it is admirable of Europe to try to find this middle way and keep everything in balance without interfering with research and progress.

[@DJDiskmachine]

@@bazzfromthebackground3696 you're describing capitalism

[@0w784g]

"ex-EU digital commissioner Neelie Kroes, one of Brussels' top officials, was in talks to join Uber before her term ended - and then secretly lobbied for the firm". Turns out the EU stinks of big tech corruption.

[@kyoni6098]

Wow, EU is really ramping up the "stick" to stop monopoly abuse and similar practices ... 10-20% of global $$ turnover ... compared to GDPR's 2-4% ... I wonder why lobbies have not been able to push back or soften this up? it seems Brussels is really finally standing up vs big corps to put fairness and morals back into the economy.

[@dudono1744]

maybe it was softened

[@thecryingsoul]

The EU doesn't really have lobbying in the same way that the US does, that's why

[@alexp6013]

I can absolutely accept that the EU legislative process is slower, so long as it means that third parties have a more limited access to lobbying and can't just... write the laws of an entire continent. Edit : rephrased it to be actual english

[@MrCemicalX]

You could argue that lobbying has become less effective somewhat as consumers in the EU are getting more and more invested in their privacy on social media. There was quite a trend of many leaving Whatsapp after Facebook (as it was called at the time) bought it up. Alternative and smaller messegers that are more private like Signal for example saw a significant rise in popularity. Then there were the scandals around social media and its role in US elections and Brexit and now with RU and its botarmies its also become a security concern. Lobbying in these times for less privacy protection can easily place you in a corner you defnitly do not wanna end up in as a company in the EU.

[@Painfulldarksoul]

Brittain was doing a lot against many EU laws, including such that helped consumers, by voting *NO!* on implementing them. Now there are fewer people voting no. Brexit was a very good thing for the us in the EU, by removing a roadblock to good laws, such as this.

[@teinmeizeshi5209]

I love the punishment, 10% instead of just a few millions, they are billion dollar companies after all. Good, the punishment being in percentages will make it more of a punishment.

[@paul1979uk2000]

I've always felt that governments should push small to medium size companies more at the expense of big companies. For one, there are a lot more small to medium size companies which give consumers a lot more choice, it's also a lot more competition whiles they are also far less abusive with it's position compared to bigger companies which are very controlling and try to monopolize any given market by giving us less choice and making it harder for smaller companies to compete, we see this playing out time and time again and it's rarely in the interest of competition and consumers, I also feel it holds back innovation. On the other size of the coin, I understand why countries like the US and China push big corporations and part of it is because they like to use that as a weapon on other controls, in the end, it's really about control and domination, it's rarely ever about what's best for the consumers and society at large. This is why it's great to see what the EU is doing, it doesn't always get it right but let's be honest, could you imagine how much worse things could get if left to the US government or worse, China? Both of which seem to have little interest in what's best for their own people. Funny thing is, many Americans will think a lot of this is targeting American corporations and in a sense, it is American corporations that got the ball rolling by being abusive with its monopolistic position, the thing is, corporations are not really loyal to any country, they are international now, they don't care about the people, even in the country of origin and with a lot of the policies the EU is doing, others around the world like in the US stands to benefit by that, basically by the EU doing the job the US government should be doing with its own companies.

[@teongreen5254]

The UK left the EU because they wanted to be independent. But in the end they still have to adapt to EU standarts only that they have lost their EU benefits xD

[@Chrissy717]

big brain moment

[@DanielNistrean]

It is funny how things turned out and UK needing EU more than ever now)

[@Imman1s]

@@DanielNistrean Eating that much cake give them diabetes, and those 350 million "extra" a week are not enough for the NHS to recover from decades of neglect. And you know ** hit the fan when even the clowns are protesting the unfair association with politicians.

[@janssonsamuel8005]

UK left the EU because the rich don´t want to pay tax and EU closing alot off holes. So they lie and fool and play on imegrants and won.

[@Zoza15]

Pretty much this, but knowing how Brexiteers are and their delusions, they will dismiss this as irrelevant and not important. Until its important when they knock at our door.

[@NisuUuno]

Good. American tech companies are not above European laws.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

It effects me a tiny Americain media company how is that fair?

[@Stroopwafe1]

@@GreenBlueWalkthrough Did you watch the video? Gate Keepers will have the biggest scrutiny/regulation and smaller businesses won't

[@justin-fv8qh]

what did thay do that make you say thay broke the law in the first place?

[@melodiepinkie1583]

@@GreenBlueWalkthrough I mean, if you don't want to do business with european citizen or inside the EU, you will not be affected by these laws. So it only contrains you if you take part of that market, which is totally fair in my opinion.

[@abbofun9022]

@@justin-fv8qh how about their shameless data exploitation and highly intrusive monitoring of users.

[@GeliCarlosJ]

Regulations on the big tech monopolies. We like that. Fight disinformation & misinformation & data collecting without peoples consent

[@ngonikamba]

What is disinformation / misinformation? Are conspiracy theories really just a theory or there’s truth that the EU is fighting to bury?

[@niki75]

Ah yes because "Disinformation" isint at all a malleable term that wont at all be used for anything maliscious

[@wanderingthewastes6159]

“Without people’s consent” Sir, that’s just straight up untrue 99% of the time. The government, on the other hand...

[@Temo990]

@@wanderingthewastes6159 Consent is a bit relative, though. Would you call it a consent if you barely have any choice not to consent? Without competition the only option for you to protect your data is to not use any social media, search or whatever. Which means social isolation and not being able to connect your friends (and family) anymore. By forcing large messenger services to cooperate with smaller competitors, you can know communicate with your friends while choosing the service with the best data protection terms. You actually have a choice not to consent.

[@wanderingthewastes6159]

@@Temo990 you want me to start listing the services I use/could use to bypass big tech (most of which are straight up better or not inconvenient) or save us the time and admit your positive “freedom” (privilege) point is nonsense?

[@napoleonibonaparte7198]

Anti-EU: “What has the EU done for us?!” EU: Common Market? GDPR? ESA? Bologna Process? Mobile Roaming? Consumer Rights? Consular Protection? Schengen?

[@S-Fan2006]

Anti-EU: “Okay, aside from Common Market, GDPR, ESA, Bologna Process, Mobile Roaming, Consumer Rights, and Consular Protection, what have they done for us?!” (That’s a reference to the film “Life of Brian”.)

[@noldo3837]

I would also like to mention the silent standardization and harmonizations in particular industries, norms, labeling, traffic signs, healthcare norms etc... We dont see it as one big thing, but is is in fact something like "metric system 2.0", and in the long run it save tremendous lots of money.

[@tudorifarcas]

And Erasmus. Definitely Erasmus

[@evryatis9231]

the EU has stripped my country, france, of a lots of things lol, its been basically neutered.

[@marilenaganea6578]

@@evryatis9231 can you list those "lots of things"? Thanks!

[@BriefNerdOriginal]

This is not just "against" something or someone. These laws are for something and someone. They represent a huge step for making markets serve humans instead of the opposite. And there for these are for citizens, seen as humans and not just as consumers to predate.

[@BigBoiiLeem]

I love the Brussels Effect. I have never lived in the EU (as much as I want to), and yet, my daily life has been immeasurably improved by EU Laws and Regulations.

[@paul1979uk2000]

Us remainders Brits love it as well, it gives us this warm and fuzzy notion that most EU laws, rules and regulations will filter down to the UK even thought the UK isn't in the EU any more, that and it also gets up the nose of Brexiteers because they truly thought you can have true independence when in this global connected world, there's is no such thing, you have the big players like the EU and US that makes up a lot of the rules, laws and regulations that smaller ones have to more or less follow to have good links with them, usually the laws and regulations tend to be under a different name with small differences to make it seem like it's their own law, but in truth, it's almost a carbon copy of the law another power did. Hence the reason why many think the EU is becoming a vassal of the EU because of how close we are to them geographically, it makes it very difficult to diverge away without doing a lot of economic harm and with that, it makes a lot of sense to close in a lot of the rules to benefit the economy and even if the country doesn't do it directly, companies themselves do it indirectly, as for them, if they are planning on trading in Europe, most are likely going to set their standards on EU standards even for countries that are not in the EU, in other words, countries like the UK ends up following the same rules and regulations even if they are not put in place because most companies are not going to have two different standards. Simply put, the EU market is far more important to them than the UK market so most companies standardize on EU standards for none EU countries in Europe and in many cases, even around the world.

[@sonicmeerkat]

Having appeals and an actual reason given for a takedown is what internet users have been begging for for years. I'm all for it

[@runklestiltskin_2407]

I love being in the EU, such regulations are hard to push against big company lobbying on a state level.

[@0w784g]

Depends if the company is inside a member state or not. Just say you like the protectionism the EU offers EU corporates if you want to be honest. The EU serves to protect the interests of some truly huge corporates, particularly French and German ones.

[@Ganymede559]

You'll love eating animal pap soon as well. 😁

[@oberstdeutschland8704]

Overpaid socialistic buerocrats!

[@paul1979uk2000]

@@0w784g Not quite because I would say the EU goes after EU companies more than they do international ones, just that international ones are not used to the norm in the EU and feel they can get away with bending and braking rules, especially in the US which everything is so twisted up to favour big corporations. Protectionism exist everywhere, let's not kid ourselves and in some sectors, it makes sense to do that, energy security is one area but even then, it's still to a minimum.

[@edddie7563]

you are completely brainwashed, the eu is no different than the soviet union. the EC are literally hand picked and not democratically elected. they also were saying how each country should share oil with one another, and that they would hand pick industry which gets oil. hmmmmm doesn’t that sound like something familiar

[@Mr.Septon]

Honestly, not the worst thing to do. Having it be the EU to tackle this means that it is easier to force the hand of big tech. As the EU works out some kinks, it makes it easier to demand such things elsewhere as well.

[@Alik_Odess]

So basically Big companies have to be more responsible towards their users. That's a good idea in my book.

[@bazzfromthebackground3696]

There needs to be penalties in place. I guarantee Big Tech is already trying some kind of workaround, their whole existence thrives on misdirection.

[@lawrencefrost9063]

People like you never see anything bad in regulations. You can't see how it could affect innovation, or make a product worse. Overregulation hurts or kills businesses, businesses create profits and pay taxes, therefore increasing the state coffers from which we take when we want to build roads schools and whatever else the country needs. It's so simplistic to think all corporations are evil it's good that we make their job difficult and so on...companies are just groups of people making a product or service that benefit other people. Big companies are just a bigger version of that.

[@eeeertoo2597]

@@lawrencefrost9063 Stop shilling for big companies lol, they’ll hire gullible people like you and leave you for dead if it saves them money. You’re nothing but a tool to defend their predatory practice.

[@BobuxGuy]

@@lawrencefrost9063 Why is your account one month old

[@lawrencefrost9063]

@@BobuxGuy I had to make a new one after i lost my phone and had two step authentication. Now i can't access my Gmail or KZbin. You know how many videos i had in my what to watch playlist and favorites? Over a thousand. Now i gotta start this shit from the start. Fuck my life.

[@Cainthegodslayer]

Tech giants have basically unchecked power. I welcome these laws.

[@tone6410]

Which they give to world governments to spy.

[@Xsomono]

This is huge. These pieces of legislation truely greatly improve the internet for the users and the world as a whole. One of the examples of the EU at its best.

[@florianfelix8295]

You should mention the new “chat control” initiative though which brings really into question how much the EU cares about privacy and security after all.

[@KeinNiemand]

He also didn't mention that the Digital Services act introduces trusted flaggers to censor content. It also has a rule that allows the goverment to force social media sites to censor disinformation, and they decide what's disinformation, so they can pretty much censor whatever they want, whenever they want.

[@AnimilesYT]

It is complicated, so I can't say there aren't any bad things about it. But overall I think it is a good thing. Power is scary since it can easily be abused and eventually it will get abused to some degree. We've seen this happen in the past and we can see it happen right now. Big companies are also forced to do that. They need to push the boundaries constantly if they don't want to fall behind or even get crushed by the competition. Regulations will take away the need for companies to apply harmful practices since no party can use it to gain an advantage.

[@emilhuseynov6121]

Believe it or not I had a university examination about the GDPR yesterday😂 gosh it’s so detailed and long, I was lucky they let us bring the document to the examination.

[@dplocksmith91]

Apparently the EU is creating its own version of COPPA and both banning censorship and misinformation. Depending on what your political alignment, censorship and misinformation can mean different things.

[@Temo990]

And it is probably means different things within the EU countries as well. The EU has no common standard about what illegal content, fake news and misinformation actually is. Criminal law belongs to the member states and not the union. In my country insulting someone is a crime and so insults would have to be removed by the social media services. However I don't know if every country in the EU considers it a crime (or maybe just a civil matter or nothing at all). Fake news on the other hand are often not illegal unless it would be defamtion of a person.

[@quinhoprimeiro1049]

It is NOT "The EU against Tech giants" it actualy is "The EU against Tech giants' abuse of monopoly and user data"

[@Zoza15]

And buying out smaller tech companies to prevent competition.

[@nitishpandey5578]

Hope all countries make such rules.

[@frankhaugen]

If only all EU laws was this rational and took into account the big picture stuff. And I have the impression that "big tech" has mostly accepted this in a hope that the US don't go further in regulating them. EU is really the place for international law to be created as it's census -driven to such a degree that nothing is unreasonable

[@paul1979uk2000]

A lot of the times they are, but like all governments, they get something's right and something's wrong, but imagine this, if the EU didn't exist and the US or worse, China managed to push its morals onto the world, I somehow doubt many people would want that and because of that, I'm grateful we have the EU because things could be much worse without them as the US doesn't seem to care about the people and China is way behind them.

[@frankhaugen]

@@paul1979uk2000 my biggest disagreement with EU law is the extradition -thing that has people who are provably innocent extradited for accusations of minor offences, or extradition to legal systems not recognized as meeting minimum levels of fair. As a Norwegian citizen a Spanish person can claim I committed a crime against them and even though I provably have never been to Spain, I can be extradited with no legal proceedings to evaluate any evidence and this is, directly contrary to Norwegian constitution, retroactively applied...

[@boarfaceswinejaw4516]

@@frankhaugen It requires massive adjustment, and it seems they know that. and it appears as if the cases that could result in extradition and few and far between, with the EU, understandably, being less than keen to actually enforce it for minor stuff.

[@diegoarmando5489]

@@frankhaugen Tangentially to this, as the UK and the US are not in the EU, the people responsible for Julian Assange's pending extradition to the United States ought to be court-martialed and sentenced to death

[@frankhaugen]

@@diegoarmando5489 Court Martial is reserved for military personnel and political appointees doing their appointers' bidding isn't a crime. He is technically guilty of many of the alleged charges. But I do not support any extradition to another country, because with today's technology, vid-call testomony or interrogation makes extradition just plain unnecessary

[@jokuvaan5175]

This....actually sounds pretty good. Though the rules on disinformation is a double edged sword. Like any restrictions on speech are.

[@AnilSaulnier]

Disinformation regulation is hard to write well and harder to enforce, but the alternative is letting private compan8es control what gets seen and believed

[@dadikkedude]

@@AnilSaulnier Or foreign threats like China or Russia can meddle in our affairs.

[@ipsumquaerere6927]

I believe to protect free speech, one must also protect free speech from being abused. It's a hard task but one thats worth taking on.

[@tomaslane6018]

It’s definitely better to try and address the problem of misinformation than not at all. Hopefully the issue will be monitored closely. The balancing act is hard between potential propaganda and allowing Facebook members to fuel and organize a genocide again

[@brianaguila6925]

@@ipsumquaerere6927 Here's hoping that they can agree on and implement something that doesn't step on people basic rights.

[@cooldownboi3890]

Finally. No more stupid youtube ads

[@Jay...777]

Pity they don't do the same with the US neo-cons.

[@rappakalja5295]

🤡

[@Zoza15]

Good, this gives new tech startups in the EU a chance to grow and develop for actual competition.

[@soulcatcher521]

As a tech worker, this makes me strongly consider that most services just shouldn't serve the EU market. Trying to disentangle the GDPR while being able to get an application working is already a nearly impossible technical nightmare. the GDPR regulations for example make most of the work I've personally done to stop spam and phish from flowing code that had to get chucked in the garbage can. When the regulations make it nearly impossible to halt criminal abuse, those regulations are misfiring badly. When we sought guidance from the EU on how to protect users from hostile things like spear phishing, they shrugged and said they didn't see a way. Now these new regulations are going to make fundamental protection of users even harder. It's time to consider just stopping servicing EU users entirely.

[@heilaarnezki8222]

Unlikely, EU has a consumer market of 450 000 000 with a gdp per capita of 45 000€

[@mattiasamiolo5277]

Regarding these aspect of interest, I really enjoy love in Europe

[@josephharrison8354]

Well, isn't this just a gift to the Brexiteers wrapped up in a neat little bow. This is the sort of regulations they love the EU making, because they can crow about being able to get out of the overbearing bureaucracy... Of course, none of them realise standards will probably end up being harmonised across the world anyway, because of the EU's regulatory heft.

[@paologat]

Indeed! Brexiteers will have to obey even more EU regulations they no longer have any say on, or be cut off from international markets. Aah, nothing beats the taste of freshly brewed sovereignty in the morning!

[@Hession0Drasha]

Yep the uk is annorexic and has no heft in comparison. The usa is jupiter, the eu is saturn and the uk is Titan.

[@OzoneTheLynx]

I think the argument is more about the UK just no longer getting a say in the matter and still ending up with having to follow EU rules. (Which is honestly a big part of why I want my own country to join the EU).

[@0w784g]

It's not EU regulatory heft, it's common market regulatory heft. The EU is a tacked-on political entity that sows division among European nations.

[@paologat]

@@0w784g the SM exists because of the EU and is controlled by the EU, try again. The ones who were sowing division are now gone - they did us the favor of expelling themselves, as the EU could not expel them.

[@endermeap6488]

For how much people tend to criticize the EU for being out of touch, the way these two laws are written is surprisingly conscious of how people actually interact with social media. It’s definitely way better than what i’m used to seeing in the U.S., where the ways laws are interpreted are frequently very silly.

[@vpnconsult]

This is not attack on Big Tech, but mainly on free speech for users on platforms with a big reach.

[@fabiansvensson9588]

These are excellent news. The fact that huge corporations are evading taxes is probably the largest economic issue we have. The economy right now fully depends on small and medium sized companies.

[@zurie35]

Love your videos, finding myself always watching your videos every day after a long day of work.

[@samueltrusik3251]

Again, the EU is helping the common citizen.

[@ngonikamba]

No it’s not. There will come a point in time where real preachers will hide underground from persecution. The act on disinformation is evidence

[@samueltrusik3251]

@@ngonikamba ? What preachers?

[@romxxii]

Eh, dunno if I agree with EU standardization also sets standards across the globe. I work for a company that abides by GDPR, but only _for_ EU-based customers (or customers who have data located in EU datacenters). For it to become a standard outside of the EU, individual countries would have to pass their own laws.

[@jamez6398]

Big tech companies can't monitor every single thing every single user ever uploads. It's just unworkable...

[@sfbuck415]

the DSP mission statement might sound like just political buzzwords to you but in America where Big Tech rules politicians don't have the courage to use this language and it's a breath of fresh air to hear it

[@anthonydecastro6938]

of course it is a good thing. these huge digital platforms must exercise corporate responsibility across human fields of action and interaction, particularly politics. they host channels for example that spread disinformation and influence political behaviour, particularly electoral periods.

[@arfast-xolotl]

Looking forward to uninstall all those garbage Google apps in my phone

[@YagrumBagarn]

I've been saying this for years finallyyyyyyyy it was about time! Thank you!

[@tone6410]

How does it change anything? These big tech companies have censored years?

[@triton62674]

Really pisses me off whet I get a bunch of photos sent on Messenger and the only option to share them is with... Messenger

[@SwordQuake2]

The DSA is awesome.

[@ihatesovietderp2268]

Finally, a video that lists their sources.

[@omegaRST]

Now THIS is how you fight big corporations in the modern economy. The EU market is worth more to these companies than the 10-20% fines, meaning it is cheaper for a company to pay the fine (even if painful) than get kicked out of the EU market. This is how you use the consumer's power against the corporation

[@Thracium]

Thank you! Especially valuable information! Good Luck!

[@landroid5460]

wait theese are all great! i love this!

[@deusexaethera]

These new measures are interesting, but ultimately they can't make users care about what corporations are doing with their data. I wonder if the regulations will eventually be tightened even further to ban any practices that users _would probably_ care about _if they bothered to pay attention_ to the fine print, regardless of whether they _actually_ pay attention to the fine print or not? Because at that point the regulations really would cross the line into being a nanny-state.

[@Starwars6012]

Thank you for this video

[@marcopolitical7571]

It’s kinda funny to have such well explanation out of the mouth of a Brit 👍🏼😄 But seriously, this is exactly what news outlets all over Europe should do. Like someone once said…, it’s the economy stupid. It’s fantastic to see that it’s indeed a matter of choice to make the markets do business more fairly. And because of the size of the EU the effects of this fair regulations we see the rules also have effects on the rest of the globe. Something that we have only seen from the states of America

[@arnabbiswasalsodeep]

Gdpr needs a bit of buff tho, specially making it easy to reject, optional & accept the cookies

[@HellDuke-]

I believe that is actually going into what you want to avoid doing with regulation. You want to regulate what should be or should not be done, not how. Granted some clarification can happen such as prohibiting hiding the option, however most would be hard to argue with the rule of law as pretty much the standard I see now is a colored button to accept everything and a grey button to save settings that default to off. That pretty much complies to not being hidden and even defaults to off, hard to ask for more.

[@Quwertyn007]

@@HellDuke- That is the standard and I think it's fine but I've been to sites where optional cookies are near impossible to turn off

[@philipkoene5345]

EU law on cookie consent is clear: Web users should be offered a simple, free choice - to accept or reject. All sites that hide the "reject all" option behind intentionally bad UX are breaking EU Law. Enforcement was slow so far, because there were also long grace periods in place. This is slowly coming to an end - you can expect this to gradually change in the coming years.

[@arnabbiswasalsodeep]

@@HellDuke- Hard to ask for more? when they literally hide the reject all button & even optional cookies stuff? A lot of sites just have a big green "accept all" button with the position of other buttons either being missing or hidden, like the small x boxes on annoying adverts. I love that they enforced gdpr, but blocking the pp-up means you are auto-accepting it instead of doing the opposite (since data protection & all). It's what the others have also commented, with impossible to turn off or not "being offered a simple choice"

[@RB-sb9nj]

How and why add is show. I wonder how Google will explain it's listening and then pushing adds about stuff you talk in real life

[@TheMichchaal]

I am soo proud of my eu at the moment

[@torbjornlekberg7756]

Glad to see that the EU have changed for the better these last few years.

[@Joseph_Roffey]

Using Signal as an example was a bit strange, as most Signal users explicitly use Signal to avoid their messages ending up in a Microsoft/Google/Apple database somewhere… so even if those apps offer interoperability with Signal, I’m not sure that Signal would take them up on it…

[@VitaeLibra]

I saw a video a few years back where the FBI (I think) took signal to court to get them to share their user data so they could catch a criminal. Signal gave them a blank paper since that's all the data they kept on their users

[@ForestRaptor]

@@VitaeLibra And that's that. You can't easily use the data if there is no data to harass someone with. We've all seen how a good part of "police" work is "finding someone that will satisfy the judge/governor what-ever personality" .....

[@CorporalCookie]

I think the point is more in that they COULD take it up if they wanted to. It needs to be an option, especially for smaller services, but its not a requirement, especially in the case you pointed out.

[@thelastofthehitachi972]

the thumbnail, lol

[@justinh.7846]

I think it would be really nice if I was able to easily remove bloat ware like Facebook if I don't use it so good moves on that end.

[@oakstrong1]

I'm looking forward to the day when I can uninstall all the bloatware that came with my phone, some of which doesn't even work in my region. About 50% of my apps is bloatware: I wouldn't have to worry about space for installing all the apps I want to use if I could get rid of the junk.

[@KhaalixD]

Great video!

[@tuams]

Thank you for the explanation!

[@louieuy7607]

its going to be really hard to enforce that, hope they're up to the task

[@Touhou-forever]

I think that these laws are good but being on paper can only say so myself so we will have to wait and see what happens

[@abbofun9022]

At least the EU is trying to do the right thing.

[@Touhou-forever]

@@abbofun9022 I agree

[@haruhisuzumiya6650]

Based, Australia should follow this and Gacha/mmorpgs

[@davidlefranc6240]

Good thing for sure 🤔

[@maximilliantimofte4797]

schocked about this extremly wonderful law, never thought it would happen. now the question is, will these things be enforced??? or will these stuff be effective on the EU? will these stuff affect foreign countries and their users?

[@ItsAweeb]

Yes they will. Eu does not fock around when its come down to consumer protection laws (example a company in my country managed to fail their gdpr obligations and they were fined and it was not a something a kin to "price of business" kind of deal that hapens outside of eu where some companies brake the law and pay a minor fee to basically just continue as they were, in eu the fines are usually based on what the company actually makes) Theese will be forced mainly in the Eu, but these kind of things tend to be trendsetters and trickle outside of eu as well, for example if i open an american news site it will ask me for my cookie prefernces and give all the options as any eu site would. (note they dont have to, they can just refuse to serve eu based users, but that would be stupid)

[@maximilliantimofte4797]

@@ItsAweeb that would be loosing sales and the eu market

[@itryen7632]

I'm so glad Brussels is doing this. If the American system can't handle monopolies, the EU has to be the one to do it.

[@bazzfromthebackground3696]

"can't handle monopolies?" Buddy, we built most of them.

[@GrayDogNowIDK]

Being able to report illegal content would be good

[@proy3]

As an American, I have to ask my European friends: What's it like having policymakers that actually make policy?

[@janssonsamuel8005]

Hard to say, EU rules are relly hard to see in you normal life. But when you see them it often a good thing, So feels good to live under EU. But you shoud alway have i eye in them so they don´t turn in to usa.

[@rhythmicmusicswap4173]

Well it's not perfect,But I'm happy to know mu personal datas are more protected than in USA ot other places

[@Player-re9mo]

Imagine EU forcing phone companies to add a headphone jack to their phones and include a charger with it. That would be a nice dream.

[@-mathijs]

Well just the jack is good. Nowadays we all have usb-c charger at home

[@Player-re9mo]

@@-mathijs A charger you need to pay for and which comes with a plastic box, which defeats the claim that they removed it to prevent waste.

[@-mathijs]

@@Player-re9mo oke, it's right: you pay for the charger including the ecological waste. But it's a sustainable investment. Big tech companies produces lesser chargers --> less ecological impact --> no charger in box --> customers only buys 1 charger for a larger time span. The benefit of already a universal charger is convience and so that Big tech companies produce less what everyone already has.

[@Player-re9mo]

@@-mathijs The chargers degrade over time. The charger from my old phone is dead and now I have to buy a new one because my new phone didn't include one in the box. More waste created and more money spent.

[@-mathijs]

@@Player-re9mo fair point. Not every charger is going to last for 5 years or longer

[@FonFreeze]

Im proud to be European. Now ban pay to win games. I know kids who are gambling away their lifes in pay to win games. Not only they waste time on the game alone, but also money.

[@philipkoene5345]

Yes, yes, yes - theses predatory business practices, designed to nefariously extract 1000nds of €/$ from users for "virtual" items that have no inherent value at all need to be removed and punished severely.

[@BobuxGuy]

There won't be such ban. That'll be straight an authoritarian move from EU if it happens. Max EU could do is age restrict those games

[@FonFreeze]

@@BobuxGuy Lets take as example cs go lootboxes. Those items have real money value and you spend money for keys to spin to get random item. Belgium, Netherlands did ban already innit? But ok, its maybe not under p2w hammer. Have to look deeper in p2w games and how to combat them.

[@aslantech52]

I like this. Big tech is not bigger than the European Union.

[@aname4931]

These sound like great ideas. Wish I hadn't been dragged out of the EU

[@donkorleone20]

i really don't like the narrative that the EU is working hard against big tech firms. it sounds like they want to stop them or largely impede their function. Instead, I see these regulations as ways to protect the data of end users, make _all_ platforms safer - not only big ones, and allow smaller firms to pick up and not be outpaid by big tech. Saying this is big tech is like saying making usb C a standard is against apple. There are parties that don't like these changes, but I don't think the changes are aimed at making the parties angry.

[@vladthemanpire5894]

Indeed I would say they are for users and smaller companies not against big tech.

[@andrewbrinkworth1420]

The only thing I don't agree with is the messaging service terms I think it is wrong... maybe have a way to have cross platform as a choice to users but if someone didn't trust the security of a specific app it's not fair to not give people a choice as to what app is receiving the messages

[@Xsomono]

It brings the huge advantage of making the messenger market competitive though. This way small messengers with great services and stringent privacy policy actually have a chance to beat WhatsApp and the like. It should also be doable from the technical side to make sure the highest level of encryption takes precedent when interchanging messages.

[@yurimrt]

Remarkable laws. Very much above my expectations.

[@tone6410]

Unmarkable. They are with their enemies.

[@yurimrt]

@@tone6410 didn't get what you mean

[@tone6410]

@@yurimrt All they have announced is that big tech companies have to censor "disinformation" and give governments data, which by the way they have done it like years before announcement, it's just EU making it official. They has and still are in same coin.

[@happyelephant5384]

When this legislation come into force? Or they already?

[@echidnanatsuki882]

Another good thing that the EU is doing. Keep up the good work my European Friends! Love from the shitty state of the Philippines XD 🇵🇭 ❤️ 🇪🇺

[@joyboy6535]

So how will this affect KZbin ? does mean the platform will now be responsible for copyright instead of users like it is now or is this only dangerous content?

[@la1sk203]

For some years been following channels like this one, and I am starting to think that EU is making a gamble by betting on small and medium sized companies becoming the backbone of its economy, while the rest of the comparable world goes for mono/duopolies and generally larger sized companies.

[@Alik_Odess]

It's a better idea for the long run. When there's a competition both economy and populace are in the win while with Monopoly no one wins because you become dependent on it completely and they can dictate everything without restrictions.

[@LongTran-kp3kz]

Yeah, but those big monopolies/duopolies are exactly the problem in and of themselves. We need more antitrust moves like this and start shifting paradigms AWAY from those being the norm here. That's why these pieces of legislation are a step in the right direction for doing that in this interconnected, global marketplace. Objectively, monopolies do more harm than good anyway.... especially if capitalism is supposedly the order of the day insofar as the economic model we're supposed to be hitching our wagons to here.

[@philipkoene5345]

Well, that gamble has worked very well for Germany in the past and present. Just today I learned that most next gen Chips, produced by the Asian and American companies require manufacturing equipment from a small company called ASM in the Netherlands.

[@PVPTawa]

No company becomes too big to fail, exploiting government because of the disaster they would cause if they do fail.

[@rabituin1474]

h0ser made a video on the us that explains really well why small buisness is the future

[@KGDHMF]

Good, Now Right to repair please! Changing a fucking battery in my Samsung galaxy s10+ shouldn't be this hard dammn it.

[@Ro_Gaming]

"If we can't communicate to our United States Servers without you making sure we aren't maliciously using it, then we're going to leave" said the robot towards the people who control 25% of his money flow.

[@mab9614]

I mean, regardless of how the EU is taking on these tech giants, all of us are still adhering to the rules written by a bunch of young lads over there in California.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

To be fair I didn't vote for anyone making these bills.

[@vaibhavbv3409]

Wait I thought you guys were already bought by them.

[@Woffenhorst]

@@GreenBlueWalkthrough And you're not bound by them. You're fully free to develop parallel platforms, one for the EU and one for the rest of the world, taking double the R&D cost.

[@BiWesCrew]

It is missing out on net retailers and tr he amount of data exploitation they fasttrack through the pipeline they rent out without compensating the customers for the ad overkill or big datamining.

[@timberwolfe1645]

THIS....Is HOW YOU GET THINGS DONE!!!! I don''t have an IPhone, and my sisters blame ME for not being able to call them on Facetime and not GoogleDuo. THIS SOLVES THAT!!! Brilliant!! And why Europe is TOP TIER at the Digital AGE of Legislation

[@Secret_Moon]

The ideas and spirits of the acts are all good. But as any other legislations, it's left to be seen how they implement it in real world. The acts written here sound very good in principle, but I can't help but feel it doesn't really put forward any actual solution for the technical difficulties, and more like just shifting all the problems and burdens on the companies to figure the problem out for the government. Forcing platforms to police themselves is all easier said than done. It's been proposed for decades, but the problem still lies in its practicality. How do you determine if a platform has done enough to police itself? If you deem not, do you really dare to shut the service down for the entire continent? It may take weeks if not months to even determine whether a single piece of information, like medical information, is actually legit or not. Most of the time it's not in any way black and white.

[@janssonsamuel8005]

I see were you coming from. In my head it go somthing like this. first you send them the new rules and give them time to read and aswere. And then you look what FB (insert company) have set up to follow the rules. And if you find that FB don´t work in the rules you send them latter and tell them they doing it wrong. And if they don´t change you find them a if they still do not change you close. And all this take years.

[@carlossaraiva8213]

This is one among many reasons why the EU is the oasis of the world. I wouldnt chose to live elsewhere or be a citizen of.

[@InferKnow]

This is a Step 1 with a fight against a monopoly. it’s true that realistically there should be a right to privacy and how extensive advertising is with its profiling could be used to show how it’s used more then just adverts and under there will to extend without genuine permission. The need to use a service doesn’t mean you agree with what they do with it especially when it relates to yourself as a consumer. Consumer protection should be a priority with these regulations and it’s hard to think the US will follow.

[@stephenjacobs5640]

so can we get this in Australia too

[@spaghettiisyummy.3623]

How about banning Data collection by foreign companies COMPLETELY? Regardless of if the Consumer "consented.".

[@hh8982]

we love to see it

[@davidnguyen3469]

Finally some good news for once.

[@barryholloway8565]

Uber had macron in its pocket

[@merkeet]

This isn't about tech giants, this is about you, your opinion and free speech that deviates from the mainstream narrative.

[@alberpajares4792]

Do not touch if you wanna conserve your hand,..

[@alberpajares4792]

You’re so touchi,..

[@OndraBrem]

Can you make an explainer to what happens to those huge fines when EU collects them? Is the money used to support the cause for which the regulation was put in place?

[@-mathijs]

6:32. 20%!!! That's massive

[@LongTran-kp3kz]

As long as these pieces of legislative policy are handled and managed responsibly going forward so as not to infringe on and protect the end user consumers/ rights and freedoms when engaging with and using the interwebs and other digital services/products then I personally can only see this as a net long term positive measure so long as nobody decides to go overboard or 'Big Brother' on us in the name of 'protecting' us. Treating the digital space more in terms of it being a public utility like this is honestly probably a step in the right direction.