4 ms·
I’d suggest: - Regulate that pseudonymous use of transactional services must be permitted (with exceptions for, e.g. banks, universities). You do not need my l
by confounded 9y ago
I’d suggest:
- Regulate that pseudonymous use of transactional services must be permitted (with exceptions for, e.g. banks, universities). You do not need my legal name or telephone number to ship me a package, or accept payment, for example.
- Get explicit, arduous permission from users whenever PII is obtained, if you intend to store it in any way, with exactly what it will be used for.
For existing data, over some long period of time (say, a couple of years) get users to explicitly agree to each use, or delete it.
This could work pretty much like default-off OAuth2.0 scopes. For example, you could give Facebook the ability to know your name for display on the site, but not for exchange with third parties for additional data on you, or for the purposes of advertising.
While the ‘default off’ requirement would reduce the amount of PII in circulation, it would also reduce the _false choice_ between security and privacy that Facebook, Google, Amazon, and others present between privacy and security. Want my telephone number for 2FA? Possibly, but that doesn’t mean that you can use it to buy/exchange a file on me from Equifax/Acxiom/MasterCard/whatever.
- folknor 9y ago> You do not need my legal name or telephone number to ship me a package, or accept payment, for example. That's not always true in my country. Sometimes if a package is not labelled with a name connected to the delivery address, the post office will simply return it once it reaches their sorting facility. Which has annoyed me on two occasions. And I can't see a legitimate reason for it. And I don't know if it's connected to actual law, or just a practice.