4 ms·

The Right to be Forgotten if enforced globally will create a blackmarket for this type of information. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal. Technical s

by medecau 11y ago

The Right to be Forgotten if enforced globally will create a blackmarket for this type of information. Downloading copyrighted material is illegal. Technical solutions exist and individuals are making money off of it. Buying drugs is illegal too. Solutions exist and individuals are making money off of it. Do not fool yourselves, you won't be forgotten.

icebraining 11y ago
Just like any law that prohibits stuff that isn't easily enforced.
seren 11y ago
Practically, the right to be forgotten will only diminish the ease of access to information, but won't remove them altogether. For example, a landlord can quickly Google a potential tenant. But I don't think he would try to go to a dark web black market, where he would have to pay in bitcoin some shady people, just to dig something in its past. It is probably sufficient to "protect" people in most of their everyday interactions.
marrs 11y ago
Not if you have a stalker who is willing to pay money to find dirt on you, anyway.
vidarh 11y ago
The point is not to actually be forgotten, but to create a limited barrier against casual discovery. In Norway basic income tax information is publicly accessible, and have been "forever" at the tax offices. This was considered important for accountability, while the limited access was considered to make it an acceptable loss of privacy. With the advent of the internet this information was suddenly available online, and "everyone" looked up their friends and neighbours. Suddenly the privacy impact was drastically different, and recently there has been new restrictions added to find a balance more in line with the original. This is what the right to be forgotten is about too: Practices that previously had little privacy impact, and public benefits, now have vastly different privacy impact due to the internet. As a result we need to find new balances. In some cases the benefit of the information will outweigh privacy considerations. In others they won't. Even then, so far EU courts have made it clear that the original publication is protected: Nobody has been given the right to have information wiped from newspaper archives, for example. But indexing and making that information extremely easily available is a separate issue. There's no reason for a black market: The information is still there and easily accessible for those specifically looking for that information. It is just not pushed in front of someone "just" doing a regular search for someones name.

by medecau 11y ago

icebraining 11y ago

Just like any law that prohibits stuff that isn't easily enforced.

seren 11y ago

Practically, the right to be forgotten will only diminish the ease of access to information, but won't remove them altogether. For example, a landlord can quickly Google a potential tenant. But I don't think he would try to go to a dark web black market, where he would have to pay in bitcoin some shady people, just to dig something in its past. It is probably sufficient to "protect" people in most of their everyday interactions.

marrs 11y ago

Not if you have a stalker who is willing to pay money to find dirt on you, anyway.

vidarh 11y ago

The point is not to actually be forgotten, but to create a limited barrier against casual discovery. In Norway basic income tax information is publicly accessible, and have been "forever" at the tax offices. This was considered important for accountability, while the limited access was considered to make it an acceptable loss of privacy. With the advent of the internet this information was suddenly available online, and "everyone" looked up their friends and neighbours. Suddenly the privacy impact was drastically different, and recently there has been new restrictions added to find a balance more in line with the original. This is what the right to be forgotten is about too: Practices that previously had little privacy impact, and public benefits, now have vastly different privacy impact due to the internet. As a result we need to find new balances. In some cases the benefit of the information will outweigh privacy considerations. In others they won't. Even then, so far EU courts have made it clear that the original publication is protected: Nobody has been given the right to have information wiped from newspaper archives, for example. But indexing and making that information extremely easily available is a separate issue. There's no reason for a black market: The information is still there and easily accessible for those specifically looking for that information. It is just not pushed in front of someone "just" doing a regular search for someones name.