this post was submitted on 01 Mar 2025
74 points (97.4% liked)

Privacy

1948 readers
345 users here now

Welcome! This is a community for all those who are interested in protecting their privacy.

Rules

PS: Don't be a smartass and try to game the system, we'll know if you're breaking the rules when we see it!

  1. Be civil and no prejudice
  2. Don't promote big-tech software
  3. No reposting of news that was already posted
  4. No crypto, blockchain, NFTs
  5. No Xitter links (if absolutely necessary, use xcancel)

Related communities:

Some of these are only vaguely related, but great communities.

founded 5 months ago
MODERATORS
fxomt@lemmy.dbzer0.com
otter@lemmy.ca
shaytan@lemmy.dbzer0.com
fxomt@piefed.social
74
Bill aims to prohibit 'surveillance pricing' based on customers’ online behavior (www.kpbs.org)
submitted 1 month ago by Forumite@lemm.ee to c/privacy@lemmy.dbzer0.com
8 comments fedilink hide all child comments
top 8 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] everett@lemmy.ml 19 points 1 month ago (1 children)

...in California.

[–] dance_ninja@lemmy.world 7 points 1 month ago (3 children)

True, but California is a big market. Odds are the companies will comply and some will be too lazy to create alternate rules for other states.

[–] zero_spelled_with_an_ecks@programming.dev 6 points 1 month ago

They already have the code to determine where you're from and to treat you differently based on that. That's what the bill is about. No laziness needed for the people already implementing this for profit.

[–] shades@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

Odds are they will do it anyway because ¿how the fuck is the state going to prove otherwise?

[–] sunzu2@thebrainbin.org 1 points 1 month ago (1 children)

Not if it is profitable enough to fuck Alabama person enjoy all that freedom from government

[–] lka1988@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 points 1 month ago

They do it with cars. Most cars these days are 50-state compliant. You used to have California cars and 49-state cars. Not so much these days.

[–] Flagstaff@programming.dev 9 points 1 month ago

The fact that this kind of bill even needs to be introduced is just appalling.

[–] sugar_in_your_tea@sh.itjust.works 3 points 1 month ago

Why don't we take it a step further and outlaw surveillance in general? Make it illegal to store any information that's not strictly required to operate the service, prohibit selling of customer information, require secure storage of customer information, and require complete transparency of what is stored and why. And then have real consequences for Vang breaking the law.