←back to thread

1737 points pseudolus | 10 comments | | HN request time: 0.418s | source | bottom
Show context
Uehreka ◴[] No.41860626[source]
When people try and say that regulating stuff like this is impossible, I often think about how unreasonably great the regulations around “Unsubscribe” links in emails are.

There really seems to be no loophole or workaround despite there being huge incentive for there to be one. Every time I click an “Unsubscribe” link in an email (it seems like they’re forced to say “Unsubscribe” and not use weasel words to hide the link) I’m either immediately unsubscribed from the person who sent me the email, or I’m taken to a page which seemingly MUST have a “remove me from all emails” option.

The level of compliance (and they can’t even do malicious compliance!) with this is absurd. If these new rules work anything like that, they’ll be awesome. Clearly regulating behavior like this is indeed possible.

replies(46): >>41860684 #>>41860824 #>>41860883 #>>41861066 #>>41861129 #>>41861436 #>>41861512 #>>41861678 #>>41861722 #>>41861736 #>>41861811 #>>41861814 #>>41861817 #>>41862226 #>>41862350 #>>41862375 #>>41862533 #>>41862548 #>>41862583 #>>41863105 #>>41863467 #>>41863955 #>>41863981 #>>41864245 #>>41864326 #>>41864554 #>>41864607 #>>41864815 #>>41865404 #>>41865413 #>>41865616 #>>41866082 #>>41866103 #>>41866240 #>>41866351 #>>41866850 #>>41866986 #>>41869062 #>>41869290 #>>41869894 #>>41870054 #>>41870127 #>>41870425 #>>41870478 #>>41871231 #>>41873677 #
justinpombrio ◴[] No.41861129[source]
Unsubscribe links are a fantastic regulation, but there is a workaround. I must have received at least a dozen emails from Brown after graduating despite unsubscribing to every email they sent.

The trouble is they're endlessly creative about the lists they put you on. I'd get one email from "Alumni Connections" and then another from "Faculty Spotlight" and then another from "Global Outreach" and then another from "Event Invitations, 2023 series". I'm making those names up because I forget exactly what they were called, but you get the idea. I hope this was in violation of the regulation: surely you can't invent a new mailing list that didn't used to exist, add me to it, and require me to unsubscribe from it individually.

They finally stopped after I sent them an angry email.

replies(20): >>41861495 #>>41861822 #>>41861841 #>>41862170 #>>41862481 #>>41862648 #>>41862820 #>>41862999 #>>41863186 #>>41863220 #>>41863555 #>>41863933 #>>41864179 #>>41864270 #>>41865514 #>>41865698 #>>41867204 #>>41867673 #>>41867742 #>>41868957 #
BiteCode_dev ◴[] No.41867204[source]
This is illegal in Europe, since you can't add somebody to a list without their consent.

As usual, I know it's trendy to say on HN the EU is killing innovation with all the regulations, and there is truth to that, but there is also great customer protection, which seems constantly violated in the US.

So yes, in the US, companies can flourish, but it seems the consumers are second-class citizens compared to companies.

That's why it's nice to have both: eventually, EU regulations leak out to the rest of the world, and the US innovations reach us.

We pay the price by having a weaker economy, they pay the price by having less dignity in their life, but there is eventually balance.

replies(3): >>41868379 #>>41876991 #>>41877075 #
1. HighGoldstein ◴[] No.41868379[source]
If your "innovation" is at risk from consumer protection regulations I question whether it's a good innovation.
replies(5): >>41868734 #>>41869760 #>>41869941 #>>41869968 #>>41873722 #
2. ◴[] No.41868734[source]
3. earthnail ◴[] No.41869760[source]
There are many examples of successful companies that fall into that category.

Sometimes an innovation needs critical mass to work - social networks for example. LinkedIn famously got big by being extremely aggressive on how they mined your contacts. You'd get sued to the moon and back in the EU for this behaviour.

LinkedIn is big now, it has established itself and no longer needs to be that aggressive. Any European player that tried to enter the market with a less aggressive stance had no chance - they never reached that critical mass.

replies(3): >>41870637 #>>41870935 #>>41871110 #
4. whoitwas ◴[] No.41869941[source]
No. Regulations are required so companies produce value rather than exploits. There's no stopping the exploits, especially in an environment where $$$ === speech, but regulation is required for companies to produce value for customers.
5. whoitwas ◴[] No.41869968[source]
A good example is the US "health care" system. It's a meat grinder that exploits everyone and sort of pretends to do what it's supposed to through regulation.
6. Vegenoid ◴[] No.41870637[source]
And we are all so grateful that LinkedIn's aggressive innovation was allowed to flourish.
7. InDubioProRubio ◴[] No.41870935[source]
Bayer would have never invented heroin, if there had not been a market for that and there is a market for that because its a great product. The greatest actually, surpassing all other products, including human society and its the purest form of capitalism. All other products and businesses are just pre-cursors for this one.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heroin#History

8. ◴[] No.41871110[source]
9. valval ◴[] No.41873722[source]
Since the people making the innovations and regulations are different, I fear there’s no way to implement regulation that doesn’t lead to suboptimal results.

And to be clear, when I say suboptimal results I mean misery and death in large quantities.

replies(1): >>41877144 #
10. BiteCode_dev ◴[] No.41877144[source]
Yes, but the innovators' incentives don't always align with the needs of the people the regulations should protect.

Regulation are a necessary balance, otherwise the innovators become so powerful they eventually concentrate all the power and privilege and make weaker people pay for it.

Chlorofluorocarbons were an innovation for some times, then we needed regulation to save our ozone layer. Industrial wouldn't have stopped using it.

It's a fine line, constantly moving, an nobody will never be perfectly happy about it.