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

Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

cjr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 334 posts

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#151

Post by gray_-_wolf »

aaomidi wrote: post #144
jedberg wrote: post #143

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Have you've ever been at the receiving end of a DMCA notice? If you have, you wouldn't use this analogy. DMCA is so utterly broken. There is no verification in the process and no real penalties for false claims. So people use it as a weapon to remove stuff they don't like, even if it has nothing to do with copyright.

I know. That's exactly my point. If you have enough money you will be able to take down any information of yourself you don't want under the guise of DMCA or related copyright laws.

> If you have enough money

that's how world ruled by lawyers works in general

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#152

Post by gray_-_wolf »

Khaine wrote: post #146
darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Trump is a public figure, and I'm pretty sure there is a public figure exception within GDPR to the right to be forgotten.

And if he wasn't? And become one only after applying his "right to be forgotten"? Would that make any difference?

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#153

Post by nixpulvis »

darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

Um... there are some things that are designed specifically without the right to be forgotten... Like credit, taxes, etc. The point of the right to be forgotten is to allow us to ask for services to remove all information because they are NOT these special (usually government controlled) services or systems.

Nobody in their right mind is arguing that a criminal can log onto some crime.gov and say "plz delete me", for example.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#154

Post by gray_-_wolf »

paulie_a wrote: post #89
gaius wrote: post #59

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? Your criminal record is expunged after a time. This is about whether Google is above the law of the land.

No it isn't

Depends on the country and severity of the crime

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#155

Post by kodablah »

lightbyte wrote: post #14

"Right to be forgotten" just sounds so ridiculous to me, how did this become a thing? Are people going to want to burn the history books at their local library next because it contains some information they don't like reminding people of?

> Are people going to want to burn the history books at their local library next because it contains some information they don't like reminding people of?

Nope, they want to burn the card catalog. Still wrong of course, but many people think that because people can't be trusted to act reasonably on historical, factual information they see about someone, they should legislate instead. Laws become the answer to everyone's problems, education or accepting the bad with the good in an age of transparency are just not options sadly.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#156

Post by joesb »

yulaow wrote: post #111
freeone3000 wrote: post #101

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You're arguing that the knowledge being public is somehow different from truth. I disagree with this - facts must be available. Google must be a source of information. Search engines are the interface to the web - removing information from a search engine is tantamount to erasing it from memory. The idea that people have the right to hide their pasts is a ridiculous assertion - it goes against freedom of speech, it g…

Counter-example: What if someone accused you of raping her/him and that news remains online close to your name because it's a typical scandal and heavily reported but, when it is proven that you didn't commit the crime, there is no news reporting it because it's not a clicky article? It happens frequently, not only with rape, but with any false accusation of a major crime... Typically there are a lot of articles abou…

What if the final verdict is also in news reporting but your accussor want it the final verdict news to be forgotten?

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#157

Post by dragonwriter »

drngdds wrote: post #145

I'm glad the First Amendment keeps this nonsense from happening in the US.

Constitutions don't prevent anything; people caring about rights do. Constitutions are mostly just a reminder you should care, but if an insufficient power-weighted portion of the population cares, government will do what they want no matter what some piece of paper says.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#158

Post by shakna »

gray_-_wolf wrote: post #147
shakna wrote: post #126

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And what happens when the false conviction is overturned?

In that case make it required by law to publish apology following same format as was the original article. Did you print the false claim on title page of newspaper? Same place, same size for and apology. Same with web articles. That should at least make it searchable by engines.

That information has already been dissiminated. And usually has a higher hit-rate than any correction.

We know employers can and have discriminated against individuals where convictions have been overturned.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#159

Post by kodablah »

I look forward to the day when data can be distributed and become signed/immutable but still indexed. At least then we'll be forced to deal with educating people on how to react to information instead of restricting/de-indexing it. For some it will be unfortunate that they can't put blinders on people like they could back when humans curated content retroactively, and for others it can give them comfort that those in power lose that same ability (especially wrt themselves) compared to those not in power.

Re: Google seeks to limit ‘right to be forgotten’ by claiming it’s journalistic

#160

Post by bluGill »

darawk wrote: post #2

Seems pretty journalistic to me. This "right to be forgotten" seems incredibly dangerous to me. Should we give Trump the right for his bankruptcies to be forgotten? Do we give child molesters the right for their crimes to be forgotten? Why should people have the right to have things they don't like wiped from the historical record? EDIT: I should point out, I do understand the other side. People shouldn't be punished…

In fact Trump's bankruptcies have been forgotten. The point of bankruptcy is that after a few years they disappear from your record. People who deal in credit are not allowed to know of any of trump's past bankruptcies (after a few years), they are gone and he starts over with a clean sheet.

As others have pointed out, Trump hasn't actually declared bankruptcy. There is an interesting debate about that in other threads, read them there.

Post reply on HN