zlacker

[return to "Lfgss shutting down 16th March 2025 (day before Online Safety Act is enforced)"]
1. _fat_s+ia[view] [source] 2024-12-16 18:19:12
>>buro9+(OP)
It's insane that they never carved out any provisions for "non big-tech".

I feel like the whole time this was being argued and passed, everyone in power just considered the internet to be the major social media sites and never considered that a single person or smaller group will run a site.

IMO I think that you're going to get two groups of poeple emerge from this. One group will just shut down their sites to avoid running a fowl of the rules and the other group will go the "go fuck yourself" route and continue to host anonymously.

◧◩
2. graeme+1l[view] [source] 2024-12-16 19:22:40
>>_fat_s+ia
> It's insane that they never carved out any provisions for "non big-tech".

Very little legislation does.

Two things my clients have dealt with: VATMOSS and GDPR. The former was fixed with a much higher ceiling for compliance but not before causing a lot of costs and lost revenue to small businesses. GDPR treats a small businesses and non profits that just keep simple lists for people (customers, donors, members, parishioners, etc.) has to put effort into complying even thought they have a relatively small number of people's data and do not use it outside their organisation. The rules are the same as for a huge social network that buys and sells information about hundreds of millions of people.

◧◩◪
3. jimnot+UJ[view] [source] 2024-12-16 21:54:36
>>graeme+1l
Do you know a small business that has got into trouble with GDPR?
◧◩◪◨
4. x0x0+Ij1[view] [source] 2024-12-17 03:38:29
>>jimnot+UJ
Yes. $30k in compliance costs from a pissed off ex-employee and malicious gdpr requests.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. jimnot+cH1[view] [source] 2024-12-17 08:47:25
>>x0x0+Ij1
Any more details? What information did the employee request that cost money to fulfil? Interesting that it was in dollars?
[go to top]