Varun Srinivasan
@v
🫠🫠🫠 https://twitter.com/annie_wu_22/status/1639663800591740930?s=46&t=QCqTQQzyj42Ulv0neAueVQ
9 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
timdaub
@timdaub.eth
Watched it. Super reasonable take to me tbh. Citizens should have legal right over what happens to their data and a general protective law in the states is overdue and could fix a bunch of issues. Ppl could still opt out to sell their data then.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
i'm squarely in the "don't let other nation states have the ability to subtly influence large swaths of your population during elections" camp
7 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Alex Loukissas 🍉
@futureartist
I see it as different rules for different platforms. Facebook and others do the same thing. It’s just “homegrown spying: ok, foreign: bad”. We need a level playing field of privacy protection, not a witch hunt
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Spying by foreign companies which can be influenced by an antagonistic nation state is much more dangerous for your democracy than spying by local companies.
2 replies
0 recast
0 reaction
Alex Loukissas 🍉
@futureartist
So two different set of rules is fine? Not in my book.
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
Varun Srinivasan
@v
Two different rules is the default state of the world for local vs international? (e.g. import duties on goods)
1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
