41–50 of 70 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Under current administration? No.
Because Obama or Hillary would surely do it. Come on man...
I personally don't really care about what information they collect. I do hugely care who they give that information to & what they do with it. Haven't heard anything about Google wholesale handing all my data over to anybody who clicks a couple buttons to sign up to their developer program though. I'm guessing Facebook has the technical expertise to allow 3rd parties to run aggregate (non identifying) queries on the…
> I personally don't really care about what information they collect If the government said "let's make a database of every Jew in America," people would get rightfully riled up. Yet we've allowed a single entity to assemble a database orders of magnitudes more detailed.
This is an interesting case. You're completely correct, but it's basically a special privilege that Jews enjoy (and that has spread to a taboo on asking about religion on the census). If you're part of any other demographic group and you don't want to be counted, you get yelled at for not seeing the grand scientific project of the US census in the proper light.
But I don't really see that a database of every Jew in America is more inherently suggestive of abuse (if you're a Jew) than a database of every black in America is (if you're black).
I personally don't really care about what information they collect. I do hugely care who they give that information to & what they do with it. Haven't heard anything about Google wholesale handing all my data over to anybody who clicks a couple buttons to sign up to their developer program though. I'm guessing Facebook has the technical expertise to allow 3rd parties to run aggregate (non identifying) queries on the…
It seems like Facebook gave away that information in hopes of developing a more engaging walled garden with 3rd party help, and perhaps some naivety.
> I'm guessing Facebook has the technical expertise to allow 3rd parties to run aggregate (non identifying) queries on the consenting users' data on servers they control and only allowing certain aggregated data, as well as limiting the number and type of queries 3rd parties are running.
This is a very challenging problem - multiple "non-identifying" queries can actually identify individuals. Differential privacy is the best solution so far, however it's still challenging to guarantee privacy without lowering quality far below competitors that don't care about consumers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> I personally don't really care about what information they collect If the government said "let's make a database of every Jew in America," people would get rightfully riled up. Yet we've allowed a single entity to assemble a database orders of magnitudes more detailed.
> If the government said "let's make a database of every Jew in America," people would get rightfully riled up. This is an interesting case. You're completely correct, but it's basically a special privilege that Jews enjoy (and that has spread to a taboo on asking about religion on the census). If you're part of any other demographic group and you don't want to be counted, you get yelled at for not seeing the grand s…
Any group with (a) a living memory of violent ostracisation and (b) some ability to conceal their group membership knows this.
Gay men and women, for example, would fight against a sexual orientation question on the census. (One wonders if Tim Cook, had he not been born a gay man in Mobile, Alabama, would be as sensitive to privacy issues.)
Side note: I used Jews in my example because we have a case study for them. In countries where databases of religious affiliation were kept, oftentimes for tax purposes, the Nazis took advantage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Then you have no business with users data.
Can you tell me what I need to do to make a gdpr compliant website? Is it the hacker news mindset that you should need a law degree to launch a website now? GDPR is so bad that I would rather make a HIPAA compliant service than a GDPR compliant service.
If that's still too hard, a summarized form can be found at https://www.gdpreu.org
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Can you tell me what I need to do to make a gdpr compliant website? Is it the hacker news mindset that you should need a law degree to launch a website now? GDPR is so bad that I would rather make a HIPAA compliant service than a GDPR compliant service.
The GDPR is long but trivial to read, probably high-school level at worst. The EU website has the full text here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELE... (warning: MASSIVE page) If that's still too hard, a summarized form can be found at https://www.gdpreu.org
Hopefully, this starts a meaningful conversation about what other people are also doing. I am not a fan of Facebook but this might get the ball rolling on broader legislation similar to GDPR in US.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The GDPR is long but trivial to read, probably high-school level at worst. The EU website has the full text here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CELE... (warning: MASSIVE page) If that's still too hard, a summarized form can be found at https://www.gdpreu.org
Thank you for showing me the supposedly trivial guide to understanding GDPR. The only thing that website has shown me is that no globally competitive tech company will ever grow out of the EU for the next hundred years or so.
Facebook doesn’t operate in a vacuum. They can’t scale back data collection unless others do. Moreover, the United States doesn’t exist in a vacuum either. Scaling back all US companies will give a leg up to competitors in more lenient jurisdictions.