Live data from Hacker News

Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

cnil.fr

301–306 of 306 posts

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#301
post #3

> When a user logged into a voice room closes the DISCORD application window by clicking on the "X" icon at the top right of the window in Microsoft Windows, they actually just put the application in the background and stay logged into the voice room. However, in Microsoft Windows, clicking on the "X" at the top right of the last visible application window will exit the application for the vast majority of applicatio…

"clicking on the "X" at the top right of the last visible application window will exit the application for the vast majority of applications."

It used to be like you describe, but this is a disappearing rule. An increasing amount of companies build apps designed in a way that you need to have sysadmin skills to actually terminate the program for real.

We can't expect Microsoft to require developers to implement this 'X' correctly because Microsoft itself is exploiting this loophole by keeping some of its apps alive when the user clicks the 'x' button.

This is a common trend I already mentioned here several years ago initiated by GAFAM companies to subversively rewrite the signification of common concepts that they disagree with: - "no/decline" -> maybe later - "no/decline" -> skip for now - "no/decline" -> remind me later - "close" -> sleep" / run into background - "delete data" -> hide/hide temporarily - "delete account" -> deactivate (but keep everything) - "somebody" -> best friend - "buy/pay" -> rent - "configure" -> submit your preferences, we will take that into account etc.

All these concepts are being actively stolen from the population and I am terribly saddened to see the vast majority of our regulators have absolutely no clue about the long-term consequences of this concepts being stolen/rewritten without tacit consent.

So, yes, Discord rewrote the 'x' button but to be honest: who cares? Apparently only too few.

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#302
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that's also an issue that Discord should work on.

The majority of that issue IIRC lies upon the Microsoft Window Manager, and if true, not much Discord can do about that.

Sure, but if Discord is processing and displaying something, Discord can change that behaviour when it's minimised.

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#303
post #234

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then that's also an issue that Discord should work on.

huh? He just explained how that's not how it works. Are you suggesting Discord to mail angry comments to windows' window manager team?

Discord is choosing to display things and can tell if you have minimised it, they don't need Windows to make any changes.

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#304

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Governments aren't your friends either

At least the government is supposed to protect its citizens from harm and not act for its own interest, but yeah, debatable nowadays

No post body was provided.

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#305
post #203
post #201

Would GDPR still apply if discord stored all personal data on other p2p clients?

Yes. GDPR is not focused on storage only, but on data handling as a whole. No matter where the data is stored, it's still collected and handled by Discord, thus they are responsible for what they do with it.

No post body was provided.

Re: Discord fined €800k for failing to comply with several obligations of the GDPR

#306

Sorry but the points are totally valid. If you delete your account your messages are still available with a userid that if someone has it can be traced back to you. They also don't delete files or pictures you uploaded alone for this they should get fined.

I think they ended up fixing this, all the deleted users I can find resolve to UID 456226577798135808. Although, messages that used to @mention the user don't have their UID mangled (since @mentions are really ` `), so it'd be easy to correlate someone @pinging a deleted user and that deleted user responding to the ping. Seems like fixing this would be pretty challenging (logistically and computationally) given you'd…

Mentions are also listed in the message metadata, in the allowed_mentions field, therefore it should be very easy for Discord to strip mentions of deleted users' IDs.
Post reply on HN