11–20 of 78 posts
GDPR is trade restriction as the notion of "digital privacy" is perpetrated by those who want to restrain US tech companies.
It's forced us to think more carefully how we build systems to pick up, retain and scrub data. So all clients (>1,000) and their clients (likely in the millions) have benefited
They absolutely won't have noticed a difference - by design!
Unbeknownst to downstream users, there are now more rigorous systems in place to manage this information and reduce the surface area where it might be captured
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately, yes. I haven't knowingly opted-in to anything. This may be a problem with the whole "click here to accept all these cookies" bullcrap that is on every site. I dont think this apparent benefit of the GDPR has worked - at all. However, in the organisations I have worked with professionally, GDPR is absolutely working - user data collection, storage and security is now a leading conversation - whereas it…
Accept cookies has nothing to do with GDPR. GDPR has to do that if you provide your phone/mail to some shop or other service they can only use it to contact you with information directly related to their business, like processing your order etc. They can not send you marketing stuff unless you explicitly consented and must remove you from lists if you ask. Even delete your account if you ask (not the data tho).
But the real benefit is this:
Some random online store that i bought something from once decided to send me a spam sms around black friday.
One email and 24 hours later, all the data they had about me was deleted.
Of course, this only works if you're in europe buying from an european store so they're subject to fines from some trigger happy privacy authority.
Assholes like Google still do not ask for consent. Guessing someone at the EU is working on gathering a mountain of documentation so they can fine them that famous 4%.
In the run-up to the GDPR we saw an increase in companies that started to take security and privacy a lot more serious than before. Before the GDPR all data was viewed as an asset and more was better.
After the GDPR went live - and especially after the first fines were issued - this has substantially improved, most - but definitely not all - companies that can afford it now have their security at a reasonably high level, they've hired in-house specialists to help analyze the risks of their operation. Typically access to live databases is now far more restricted and so on.
There are some downsides as well, but that was to be expected (such as: the GDPR being used as an excuse to do things via web portals that used to be done via email, of course that same email can be used to reset the password to the portal...). Overall I'd say the improvement is vast.
So I sent them a GDPR request, and they told me exactly what data they had and which data they didn't have (confirming that it was next to nothing, and thus that I didn't have to worry about the breach too much). They also confirmed which wallets are in the account (allowing me to confirm that they were empty, as expected, thus giving me no reason to fill ou the KYC).
Without GDPR, I'd be faced between the choice of giving them more data, or not being able to confirm that the wallet is empty (thus potentially losing out on cryptocurrency that I had forgotten about). In the end, I'd have probably provided the information, potentially exposing it when they will inevitably have the next breach.
Before that, Germany already had GDPR-style laws. I get very little spam, because people don't sell my address. I think there was one case where my address was passed along - I demanded to be told who passed it along, deleted, and the deletion request be passed on too, and the spam stopped. Doesn't work for completely fly-by-night companies and proper spammers, but does work for the ones who try to stay on the shady-but-not-illegal side (losing one address doesn't matter to them, and is certainly not worth the trouble of not complying with the deletion request).
I'm literally not using a spam filter.
In each case, A had no legitimate reason to store or process my data. In particular the GDPR forbids them explicitly to exchange C's data with any third party. Doing so could lead to severe penalties.
In all three cases I only had to point out these facts once to stop the whole claim. Very comfortable.
Personally, I feel the conversation on data in many organizations has helped me feel more secure in my privacy considerations. Although it may not be because of the GDPR, I feel I can make facebook/google/ accountable about my personal information, if I really wanted to. Although I have not done it yet.
Well, the cookie popups have helped me become more selective in my browsing. If they don't make it reasonably easy to opt out, I just don't open the site. But the real benefit is this: Some random online store that i bought something from once decided to send me a spam sms around black friday. One email and 24 hours later, all the data they had about me was deleted. Of course, this only works if you're in europe buyi…