> Ummm thats how the world works, frankly its like saying water is wet. Whenever a hospital works with any third party provider, it signs a BAA agreement which

> Ummm thats how the world works, frankly its like saying water is wet. Whenever a hospital works with any third party provider, it signs a BAA agreement which governs the sharing of data Most BAA agreements are for things that are actually and unambiguously direct care, and for the actual patient being treated, and only obviously relevant data used for a particular business processes. Like lab results or billing, for example. Most of the data Google received was for people who it's unambiguously NOT providing direct care to. And even for the people who might be helped with their app, IMO "direct care" is still a stretch. So, this agreement was not standard or normal in terms of scope or quantity. That's almost tautologically true, since what DeepMind is doing is presently abnormal. Now, you may argue that it should be allowed without additional data protections. But don't mis-characterize. Most BAA's are significantly different in scope and purpose from from this agreement in any number of ways. > No they don't. For starters Deep Mind has not even returned any collected data. They've agreed to independent auditing, which is a huge improvement. Source: https://deepmind.com/blog/working-nhs-build-lifesaving-technology/ https://deepmind.com/blog/working-nhs-build-lifesaving-techn...