2 ms·
There's nothing there which clarifies that "delete" isn't a euphemism for "flag it to no longer be displayed to users" like it is everywhere else where companie
by kerkeslager 9y ago
There's nothing there which clarifies that "delete" isn't a euphemism for "flag it to no longer be displayed to users" like it is everywhere else where companies collect data on users, so you'll excuse my skepticism.
- lerpa 9y agoExactly and they have the perfect excuse: "Well when talking about deleting we mean we do the exact same thing the file system does to a file, it flags it, but doesn't actually erase it's content. Acting like a filesystem delete operation is what people expect when using that word"
- kerkeslager 9y agoThat would be somewhat reasonable if it were just an implementation detail. But unfortunately, it's not just an implementation detail. When a filesystem has data to write and runs out of hard drive space, it overwrites the data which was flagged for deletion. But when a web 2.0 company has data to write and runs out of hard drive space, they buy more hard drive space, usually automatically.
- icebraining 9y agoIt probably is an implementation detail. I'd bet you 64 days is time is takes for all their backups to be rotated. Not that I think that's legitimate! Implementations can be changed, just like you could write a filesystem that shreds files when they are deleted.