3 ms·

> So the only explanation for this behaviour is that there's some shady shit going down that they want to stop before they have to admit to it. No, it can some

> So the only explanation for this behaviour is that there's some shady shit going down that they want to stop before they have to admit to it. No, it can something as simple as "we cannot guarantee that all your data is deleted with our current storage system". It would be a lot better if people stop being so alarmist.

xmodem 8y ago
Why can't they comment on it? It's very suspect.
- aeorgnoieang 8y ago
  I'd guess they're afraid of legal liability.
gregknicholson 8y ago
If it were something that simple and reasonable, they'd be happy to say so. The fact of not giving an explanation implies that the real explanation is worse that you would expect.
kuschku 8y ago
The deletion doesn’t have to happen immediately, just in a reasonable time frame. A few weeks is okay, too. So if it was just that, they wouldn’t shut down.
Silhouette 8y ago
It would be a lot better if people stop being so alarmist. Indeed. It's odd looking at discussions about the GDPR on HN. On the one hand, we have people who argue that compliance isn't really that big a deal if you're not doing anything horribly wrong, most ethical businesses would already be mostly compliant anyway, etc. On the other hand, we have people who argue that even if that is the case, the length and ambiguity of the regulations and guidance combined with the potential penalties still cause significant overheads and risks, particularly for smaller businesses without dedicated resources to deal with compliance matters. There is some truth behind both of those positions, I think. But then I've seen so many comments now on HN and other geek-friendly forums that seem to be based on the premise that most/all businesses are somehow doing evil things with personal data and they must be stopped. A noticeable number of people are advocating obviously vexatious use of the new subject rights, not in response to any specific concern or after some unsatisfactory attempt to resolve concerns reasonably, but as a weapon with the clear goal of causing maximum disruption and cost to organisations. I wonder how anyone can think giving so much "legal ammunition" to these people is a good idea.
- 4684499 8y ago
  > so many comments now on HN and other geek-friendly forums that seem to be based on the premise that most/all businesses are somehow doing evil things with personal data and they must be stopped I think it's pretty reasonable to have that premise when those businesses can't tell their users what they did or will do with personal data. No one could even tell whether it's evil or good if you don't show me some details. And sometimes, you assume it's good for me, but I think it's bad for me. Thank you for your good intention but all I want is just an opt-in option, not opt-out, is that so hard to accept? When you drag me into something I don't want, why would I assume you are doing something good? Users being alarmist is not users' fault, data companies' unethical use of data made users react this way. > "we cannot guarantee that all your data is deleted with our current storage system". If so, just say it. But after that, you may want to explain to me why you can't even take care of my data while claiming you respect it. Did you collect my data then just forget where you store it? If the deletion is that hard, why should users trust such company in the first place? GDPR is an action of defense, not a weapon for invasion. Only predator would think it's a weapon and be afraid. GDPR is not perfect for now, but complaining the ambiguity of it doesn't make internet companies' vague ToS or Privacy Policy clear as crystal. Let's not play double standards here. I'm quite aware HN is full of people work in data industries, I just have to say it.

xmodem 8y ago

Why can't they comment on it? It's very suspect.

aeorgnoieang 8y ago
I'd guess they're afraid of legal liability.

gregknicholson 8y ago

If it were something that simple and reasonable, they'd be happy to say so. The fact of not giving an explanation implies that the real explanation is worse that you would expect.

kuschku 8y ago

The deletion doesn’t have to happen immediately, just in a reasonable time frame. A few weeks is okay, too. So if it was just that, they wouldn’t shut down.

Silhouette 8y ago

It would be a lot better if people stop being so alarmist. Indeed. It's odd looking at discussions about the GDPR on HN. On the one hand, we have people who argue that compliance isn't really that big a deal if you're not doing anything horribly wrong, most ethical businesses would already be mostly compliant anyway, etc. On the other hand, we have people who argue that even if that is the case, the length and ambiguity of the regulations and guidance combined with the potential penalties still cause significant overheads and risks, particularly for smaller businesses without dedicated resources to deal with compliance matters. There is some truth behind both of those positions, I think. But then I've seen so many comments now on HN and other geek-friendly forums that seem to be based on the premise that most/all businesses are somehow doing evil things with personal data and they must be stopped. A noticeable number of people are advocating obviously vexatious use of the new subject rights, not in response to any specific concern or after some unsatisfactory attempt to resolve concerns reasonably, but as a weapon with the clear goal of causing maximum disruption and cost to organisations. I wonder how anyone can think giving so much "legal ammunition" to these people is a good idea.

4684499 8y ago
> so many comments now on HN and other geek-friendly forums that seem to be based on the premise that most/all businesses are somehow doing evil things with personal data and they must be stopped I think it's pretty reasonable to have that premise when those businesses can't tell their users what they did or will do with personal data. No one could even tell whether it's evil or good if you don't show me some details. And sometimes, you assume it's good for me, but I think it's bad for me. Thank you for your good intention but all I want is just an opt-in option, not opt-out, is that so hard to accept? When you drag me into something I don't want, why would I assume you are doing something good? Users being alarmist is not users' fault, data companies' unethical use of data made users react this way. > "we cannot guarantee that all your data is deleted with our current storage system". If so, just say it. But after that, you may want to explain to me why you can't even take care of my data while claiming you respect it. Did you collect my data then just forget where you store it? If the deletion is that hard, why should users trust such company in the first place? GDPR is an action of defense, not a weapon for invasion. Only predator would think it's a weapon and be afraid. GDPR is not perfect for now, but complaining the ambiguity of it doesn't make internet companies' vague ToS or Privacy Policy clear as crystal. Let's not play double standards here. I'm quite aware HN is full of people work in data industries, I just have to say it.