81–90 of 178 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
At least make it an explicitly protected right to lie about your race in any context. It's a lot easier to ruin a dataset than it is to hide from it.
What would happen if you just lied? I guess you wouldn't get healthcare coverage once they found out? But isn't there something in law about material damages, they'd have to prove you cost them money by choosing the wrong race?
How is this not a HIPAA violation?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
HIPAA as a law is intended to ease transfer of medical information, not restrict it.
That's not true. It's intended to define a regulated and standard means of transferring medical information while ensuring confidentiality and patient privacy. https://www.hhs.gov/hipaa/for-professionals/privacy/laws-reg... You have to explicitly grant permission for your data to be sold. What's very likely is that either the healthcare provider or insurance company included a request for authorization to sell that d…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wouldn't be surprised if both are illegal. But these days, the correlation between "X is illegal" and "larger org's do not do X" just ain't what it yousta be.
My understanding is that it's legal with opt-in, but the opt-in is allowed to be confusing, opaque, and sticky, so most people "consent" without informed consideration. We really need to revisit contract law in a modern context. Call me crazy but I don't think it's reasonable that our society operates in such a way that easily 90+% of people are subject to contract terms they signed but don't know or understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Why would politicians ever pass such a law? Who do you think they work for? update: Yeah, my bad. The point of this comment was to express my increasing cynicism at how we just keep seeing this kind of corporate behavior over and over again and how even when a tiny win is achieved on things like data collection, right to repair, ease for cancelling subscriptions, privacy, and so on and so on, they are so quickly over…
What's the point of this kind of comment? Have pro-citizen anti-corporate laws never been passed in the past?
> Nearly all of the 20 state-run health insurance exchanges in the US have added advertising trackers that transmit user activity ...why? > State officials say they embed this technology on the exchanges to measure marketing campaigns and to advertise to people who visit their sites What an absurdist reality we live in > Tara Lee, a spokesperson for the Washington state exchange, said the tracker on the site was used…
The same reason that I put Google Analytics on my blog in 2014. They want to know how many people are using their site and how.
And like me, they didn't think about the fact that these analytics services are run by advertising companies that may use the data for other purposes. Unlike me, they have privacy laws to follow because they work with health data.
How is this not a HIPAA violation?
The richest tech companies and richest men in the world got rich by invading people's privacy and selling invasive ads.
They got rich because people were stupid enough to think free services come without a cost.
Crypto rug-pulls are now done by a sitting president and if you complain you simply have a "victim mentality" because you're not looking for a way to exploit your neighbor.
We should really be embarrassed of our selves yet people come on here every day to defend the scammers.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's a tracking pixel. They fool you into sending it.
The relevant facts are that the website owner voluntarily put the tracking code on their own website, and the tracking code worked as designed.
The civil discussion should now be about the punishment for that.
Regulation is required for handling people's data
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My understanding is that it's legal with opt-in, but the opt-in is allowed to be confusing, opaque, and sticky, so most people "consent" without informed consideration. We really need to revisit contract law in a modern context. Call me crazy but I don't think it's reasonable that our society operates in such a way that easily 90+% of people are subject to contract terms they signed but don't know or understand.
easily 90+% of people are subject to tens of thousands of pages of contract terms they signed but don't know or understand. It's madness.
The only things in a contract that can be enforced must be stated plainly and clearly
Turns out there are o ly a few conditions that are actually necessary