3 ms·
> 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 for
by kuschku 9y ago
> 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?
The right to be forgotten only extends to people that are not public personalities, and only to facts that either are invalid (with proof), or irrelevant, but potentially harmful (e.g. you might argue that a ban you received on a minecraft server when you were 14yo, but which shows up as first result for your name on Google, would negatively impress employers, without having factual relevance).
The right to be forgotten has specifically exemptions for all the cases you mentioned.
- danShumway 9y agoShould the government be able to decide what facts are irrelevant to the public, or too harmful to allow the public to know? You don't think that sets a dangerous precedent for abuse?
- Dylan16807 9y ago> what facts are irrelevant to the public It should be in the form of broad categories, minimizing the risk of abuse. > too harmful to allow the public to know Totally different topic.
- kuschku 9y agoThe legislative has made laws which the courts have interpreted for this task since time immortal, and the legislative will make laws which the courts interpret for this task until our civilization ends. So, yes, they should. Without this, no rehabilitation is ever possible, every childhood mistake will affect you in your job.