21–30 of 249 posts
Good. Grindr is probably the best example of extremely high brand & network value vs shockingly poor security & application quality. The company demonstrates zero integrity and needs to be shut down or fined to death. It would send a proper warning to the industry, though long overdue.
6,500,000 NOK is $734,246 or £546,715 Edit: top of the article had an incorrect amount.
> As such, it considered that a fine of €6,500,000 (NOK 65,000,000) was appropriate and dissuasive.
The sooner companies start to realize that personal data is a liability rather than an asset the better. Happy to see this fine, but as far as I'm concerned given the kind of data we're talking about here it should have been higher.
Good. Grindr is probably the best example of extremely high brand & network value vs shockingly poor security & application quality. The company demonstrates zero integrity and needs to be shut down or fined to death. It would send a proper warning to the industry, though long overdue.
Why people use apps website for personal stuff like that is beyond me. Just because some hip looking company is making an app/website doesn't mean it is secure or good data custodian.
Clearly people use the app because the app answers a user need. So what’s your answer to the user need?
The sooner companies start to realize that personal data is a liability rather than an asset the better. Happy to see this fine, but as far as I'm concerned given the kind of data we're talking about here it should have been higher.
I remember someone here putting it this way: treat user data like uranium, not oil. Both are valuable, but you don’t want to just collect and store an unlimited amount of uranium. Collect the bare minimum user data you need to operate your business and then dispose of it when it’s no longer needed.
The sooner companies start to realize that personal data is a liability rather than an asset the better. Happy to see this fine, but as far as I'm concerned given the kind of data we're talking about here it should have been higher.
Or you could see it as operating in the EU is a liability. If you don't handle data in just the way they like they will come after you.
The sooner companies start to realize that personal data is a liability rather than an asset the better. Happy to see this fine, but as far as I'm concerned given the kind of data we're talking about here it should have been higher.
Or you could see it as operating in the EU is a liability. If you don't handle data in just the way they like they will come after you.
EU member states and representatives decided that not having certain business models is preferably. Them leaving the single market is a welcome result.
The sooner companies start to realize that personal data is a liability rather than an asset the better. Happy to see this fine, but as far as I'm concerned given the kind of data we're talking about here it should have been higher.
Or you could see it as operating in the EU is a liability. If you don't handle data in just the way they like they will come after you.
That this doesn't align with the free-for-all that was the WWW for the first two and a half decades doesn't change that, morality isn't all that hard and each and every company that crosses those lines is very much aware of it. These are not accidental misinterpretations of the law by any stretch of the imagination, they are wilful abuse.