7 ms·

PSA: Please make sure you're not relying on HN comments for your understanding of the GDPR if you're the one responsible in your organization. I need to get bac

PSA: Please make sure you're not relying on HN comments for your understanding of the GDPR if you're the one responsible in your organization. I need to get back to all the panicked questions CS has forwarded to me (the DPO equivalent for my company), but please understand that there's a lot of misunderstanding in every HN thread on this topic.

akvadrako 8y ago
To generalise this, there's a lot of misunderstanding in every HN thread on most every topic.
oblio 8y ago
Heh, I'd say that it's even worse than "misunderstanding". Besides honest misunderstanding, there's so much FUD being spread by people on HN who are afraid that their greedy data manipulation plan for a startup has been completely foiled... So much FUD that you definitely feel sometimes that the comments are straight out of http://n-gate.com/ http://n-gate.com/ Caricaturizing (a bit): "HN1: The GDPR takes away our freedom to make tons of money from your private data! Dirty EU commies and their superstate imposing their law worldwide! HN2: The law doesn't apply worldwide and it protects my privacy. Just block users which are geographically in the EU. Also, read the law, it's only 60 page and more readable than most RFCs. HN2: Nah, I'm good, I'll just rely on internet FUD as my main source of info. Dirty EU commie bureaucrats!" PS: Obviously not all comments are misguided, but good God, there's soooooo many which miss the mark by a mile...
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- DonbunEf7 8y ago
  Please do not violate the Prime Directive. Thanks.
  - oblio 8y ago
    > Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say face-to-face. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. I was snarky but it is definitely something I would say to you face-to-face. The quality of discussion around the GDPR here on HN was not up to the standard quality. Part of it was because, in my opinion, a lot of people here are entrepreneurs and this made them really subjective and almost blind-sided them to the benefits for users. The GDPR is not perfect but it's a great long term measure, one I hope will be followed (and improved upon!) by other administrations.
jwr 8y ago
And it's not just HN. I've listened to at least three podcasts by now where "well-known figures" offer advice that is just plain wrong. US readers: EU law is different from US law in that it is generally approachable and readable. While in the US it is difficult to even know which laws apply to you without the help of an experienced lawyer (because of case/precedent law), in the EU this is much easier. So don't be afraid to reach for the sources.
- someguy2018 8y ago
  The fact that there's so much confusion suggests that it is not that easy to understand. I've read it and I'm still confused. Without caselaw and a lawyer how am I to determine which data processing are considered "legitimate interest" in Article 6? Recital 47 is supposed to clarify this, but it's still pretty vague and it says legitimate interests may provide a legal basis for processing. May? How do I know if they do or do not?
  - grabeh 8y ago
    Legitimate interests and consent should be the two processing grounds that you rely on as a last resort here. As to your point, legitimate interests requires a balancing act between your interests and others' interests and so is by its nature going to be uncertain. If you are looking to rely on legitimate interests, you should look to document your interests that you think are being served through the processing, and also check to see if any other processing bases may be more suitable to achieve your objective. The aim is to at least have a defensible position behind your use of legitimate interests. Here an example of Facebook listing out their legitimate interests in making use of data: https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/legal_bases https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/legal_bases
  - Silhouette 8y ago
    It's disappointing to see comments like the parent being downvoted. Evidently the situation still isn't clear, because if it were then we wouldn't be having GDPR-related discussions on HN almost daily now where people who are currently dealing with these issues professionally have reached very different conclusions and/or received very different advice. I think the biggest problem for many of us is still the uncertainty. For all the mountains of "guidance" now being generated by the EU and the national regulators at five to midnight, there is still very little advice provided that is unambiguous and actionable when it comes to some of the most fundamental questions. What does or doesn't constitute a legitimate interest basis for processing data? When is such an interest is or isn't overridden by the subject's own interests? How long would be considered a reasonable period to retain data for common purposes? Answers like "as short a time as possible, but that might be 20 years" simply aren't useful.

akvadrako 8y ago

To generalise this, there's a lot of misunderstanding in every HN thread on most every topic.

oblio 8y ago

Heh, I'd say that it's even worse than "misunderstanding". Besides honest misunderstanding, there's so much FUD being spread by people on HN who are afraid that their greedy data manipulation plan for a startup has been completely foiled... So much FUD that you definitely feel sometimes that the comments are straight out of http://n-gate.com/ http://n-gate.com/ Caricaturizing (a bit): "HN1: The GDPR takes away our freedom to make tons of money from your private data! Dirty EU commies and their superstate imposing their law worldwide! HN2: The law doesn't apply worldwide and it protects my privacy. Just block users which are geographically in the EU. Also, read the law, it's only 60 page and more readable than most RFCs. HN2: Nah, I'm good, I'll just rely on internet FUD as my main source of info. Dirty EU commie bureaucrats!" PS: Obviously not all comments are misguided, but good God, there's soooooo many which miss the mark by a mile...

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
DonbunEf7 8y ago
Please do not violate the Prime Directive. Thanks.
- oblio 8y ago
  > Be civil. Don't say things you wouldn't say face-to-face. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more civil and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. I was snarky but it is definitely something I would say to you face-to-face. The quality of discussion around the GDPR here on HN was not up to the standard quality. Part of it was because, in my opinion, a lot of people here are entrepreneurs and this made them really subjective and almost blind-sided them to the benefits for users. The GDPR is not perfect but it's a great long term measure, one I hope will be followed (and improved upon!) by other administrations.

jwr 8y ago

And it's not just HN. I've listened to at least three podcasts by now where "well-known figures" offer advice that is just plain wrong. US readers: EU law is different from US law in that it is generally approachable and readable. While in the US it is difficult to even know which laws apply to you without the help of an experienced lawyer (because of case/precedent law), in the EU this is much easier. So don't be afraid to reach for the sources.

someguy2018 8y ago
The fact that there's so much confusion suggests that it is not that easy to understand. I've read it and I'm still confused. Without caselaw and a lawyer how am I to determine which data processing are considered "legitimate interest" in Article 6? Recital 47 is supposed to clarify this, but it's still pretty vague and it says legitimate interests may provide a legal basis for processing. May? How do I know if they do or do not?
- grabeh 8y ago
  Legitimate interests and consent should be the two processing grounds that you rely on as a last resort here. As to your point, legitimate interests requires a balancing act between your interests and others' interests and so is by its nature going to be uncertain. If you are looking to rely on legitimate interests, you should look to document your interests that you think are being served through the processing, and also check to see if any other processing bases may be more suitable to achieve your objective. The aim is to at least have a defensible position behind your use of legitimate interests. Here an example of Facebook listing out their legitimate interests in making use of data: https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/legal_bases https://www.facebook.com/about/privacy/legal_bases
- Silhouette 8y ago
  It's disappointing to see comments like the parent being downvoted. Evidently the situation still isn't clear, because if it were then we wouldn't be having GDPR-related discussions on HN almost daily now where people who are currently dealing with these issues professionally have reached very different conclusions and/or received very different advice. I think the biggest problem for many of us is still the uncertainty. For all the mountains of "guidance" now being generated by the EU and the national regulators at five to midnight, there is still very little advice provided that is unambiguous and actionable when it comes to some of the most fundamental questions. What does or doesn't constitute a legitimate interest basis for processing data? When is such an interest is or isn't overridden by the subject's own interests? How long would be considered a reasonable period to retain data for common purposes? Answers like "as short a time as possible, but that might be 20 years" simply aren't useful.