Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

chicagotribune.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

361–370 of 447 posts

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#361

Post by vonmoltke »

MattConfluence wrote: post #336
marcinzm wrote: post #315

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most places would log the IP (for spam prevention, security tracking, etc) which is personal information under GDPR.

Yes, but if you are logging the IP for spam prevention, security tracking, etc , then you are in the clear per Article 6, section 1, point f [1]. However, you can't also use the IP for fingerprinting, ad targeting, etc, without acquiring informed consent, per section 1, point a. You can put the IP in your security logs because that is necessary to secure the service. Just have a routine to scrub the logs once they ar…

Article 6 establishes lawful purposes for data processing that do not require consent from the data subject. All other provisions of the GDPR (including, but not limited to, the maximum time you are allowed to hold the data) apply, since it is still Personal Data. The only way to avoid having to deal with GDPR entirely is to collect absolutely no Personal Data, which is almost impossible unless your web server has no logs.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#362

Post by OnlineCourage »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #245

"Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism." It's 2020 and american websites still go the "We'd rather block you alltogether than te…

Why would you want to attack an American newspaper which actually pays journalists to research and present stories for free in a time when the US media is full of horrible paid propaganda? Journalists are being murdered around the world right now, Facebook and large tech conglomerates are destroying Western journalism yet you are upset because an old school newspaper does not "comply with your law?" Fuck your European arrogance, you can keep your views...they owe you nothing. Pay for a subscription, then you can complain.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#363

Post by thrower123 »

Most of this nonsense could have been dispensed with if the original prosecutors hadn't tried to make the whole thing go away when it became clear that the original narrative was fraudulent. Hate crime hoaxes are terrible, because they undermine credibility when the real thing does occur. For that he ought to be nailed to the wall.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#364

Post by rkangel »

ComodoHacker wrote: post #174

From linked article[0]: >— Cook County prosecutors drop all charges against Smollett, calling it an “appropriate resolution to this case.” >“After reviewing all of the facts and circumstances of the case, including Mr. Smollett’s volunteer service in the community and agreement to forfeit his bond to the City of Chicago, we believe this outcome is a just disposition and appropriate resolution to this case,” the state…

German law also seems to allow for it under some circumstances. Bernie Ecclestone for example: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-28656050

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#365

Post by DarkWiiPlayer »

marcinzm wrote: post #315
asutekku wrote: post #308

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I mean you shouldn’t store any personal information in the logs to begin with.

Most places would log the IP (for spam prevention, security tracking, etc) which is personal information under GDPR.

> which is personal information under GDPR

Not exactly; it's up to the judges to decide whether IP addresses count as personal information as defined by the GDPR (in my opinion they're not, but I can see why one would think differently), so the flaw isn't as much inherent to the GDPR as to the fact that people just don't understand the internet.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#366

Post by Archit3ch »

DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #245

"Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries. We are engaged on the issue and committed to looking at options that support our full range of digital offerings to the EU market. We continue to identify technical compliance solutions that will provide all readers with our award-winning journalism." It's 2020 and american websites still go the "We'd rather block you alltogether than te…

> "Unfortunately, our website is currently unavailable in most European countries." - Lawmakers are happy that the company complies with regulations. - Website builders are happy because they don't need to spend extra effort for no extra profit. - End users are happy that their data isn't being harvested. - The company is happy because they are complying with regulations at no extra cost. Seems like a huge win for everyone involved. /s

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#367

Post by auiya »

0xADADA wrote: post #3

I (and we should all) act as if this could happen to anyone. Essentially that the state can deputize any company to snitch on the digital ephemera that constitutes our daily lives, but especially those that we are deeply engaged: Google, Facebook, Lyft, Amazon. As such, we should not self-censor, but instead disengage from these proxy-cops and move to more distributed spaces.

> the [US] state can deputize any [US-incorporated] company to snitch

FTFY. I don't believe they have the same legal authorities to compel companies incorporated outside of their country jurisdiction to do the same, correct me if I'm wrong. This isn't the same as a sharing agreement done as a diplomatic quid-pro-quo however, which I'm sure also happens.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#369

Post by iamnothere »

ekianjo wrote: post #238
cookiecaper wrote: post #152

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's way different because big tech cos acquire and retain far more data about individuals than anyone ever expected to be available. 10-ish years ago, it wasn't possible to retroactively subpoena a year of minute-by-minute location history, because unless you had an ankle monitor, that data didn't exist. You couldn't get a letter-by-letter log of every term typed into a search engine or a log of the amount of time s…

Well you can also view things a different way. It will be a lot harder for real criminals to get away with anything in the future. Now it becomes scary only if the authorities decide to go amok and make criminals of us all, but assuming it goes this way without anyone pushing back is not too realistic.

We're already all criminals, with many people inadvertently committing multiple felonies (yes, felonies) every day: https://kottke.org/13/06/you-commit-three-felonies-a-day

This becomes terrifying when you realize the implications for quashing dissent. An inconvenient activist is an easy target for the legal system.

Re: Judge orders Google to turn over a full year of actor’s data

#370

Post by Legogris »

deith wrote: post #282
DarkWiiPlayer wrote: post #272

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't need cookie banners; they're only mandatory when you want to track your users, so when you see one of those on every website, it just means every website wants to track you. Also, if people are trained to just click them away, that's not really that bad, since tracking has to be opt-in, so if you click the banner away, you don't get tracked by default (that is, in theory; the reality is, many websites disre…

>You don't need cookie banners; they're only mandatory when you want to track your users So they are mandatory, since all websites NEED advertising revenue and analytics to function.

The one you're at right now seems to be doing fine without ad revenue.
Post reply on HN