3 ms·

The parts of gdpr that are fit-for purpose are the "non-regulator-ish" parts. The laws which basically establish what is ilegal and what carries liability. The

by netcan 8y ago

The parts of gdpr that are fit-for purpose are the "non-regulator-ish" parts. The laws which basically establish what is ilegal and what carries liability. The (most visible) part that isn't fit for purpose are all the things which gdpr solves by referring to a pseudo-contract between customer and website... permissions. The premise, that a user/reader of a website has a contractual relationship with the website... this is madness. An average user's permissions on Google or BBC does not represent their privacy preferences. They don't understand the implications and expecting them to is silly. That whole part of the legislation is doomed to (a) fail to benefit users and (b) cause freedom problems. Freedom as in free market and also freedom as in freedom and open platform. It could) should be replaced with new rules governing online advertising platforms. Most privacy issues gdpr addresses begin here anyway.

yorwba 8y ago
I used to think like you until I heard my mother talk about the data her gardeners' association collected on her and which they now had to explicitly ask for due to the GDPR. The gardens are owned by the association and leased to association members, while house, trees and other objects are property of the member. So the association has an interest to ensure that there's insurance in case e.g. of a fire, and my mother agreed. However, she did not want to reveal private details such as the value the house was insured for, and refused, which GDPR requires to be possible for all data that is not absolutely required. Many other gardeners reacted the same way. In the end the association settled for looking at proof that an insurance contract exists without recording additional details. Note that no online advertising platforms were involved, the data subjects were not exactly technically literate (most are retirees) and GDPR helped them greatly to protect their privacy. The nice thing about GDPR is that all non-essential data collection needs to be opt-in, so if someone doesn't understand the implications of a choice presented to them, they can simply refuse to agree without negative consequences. How many people accidentally opt-in to being tracked for advertising when they have to individually allow each advertiser to do so?
Angostura 8y ago
> They don't understand the implications and expecting them to is silly. Part pf the GDPR is a requirement that such things are spelled out explicitly in clear language.
DanBC 8y ago
Permission is one basis for lawful processing. There are others. A bunch of websites have been mislead into thinking that GDPR forces them to get permission for everything, or that them having permission allows them to do what they want. They are wrong.

by netcan 8y ago

yorwba 8y ago

I used to think like you until I heard my mother talk about the data her gardeners' association collected on her and which they now had to explicitly ask for due to the GDPR. The gardens are owned by the association and leased to association members, while house, trees and other objects are property of the member. So the association has an interest to ensure that there's insurance in case e.g. of a fire, and my mother agreed. However, she did not want to reveal private details such as the value the house was insured for, and refused, which GDPR requires to be possible for all data that is not absolutely required. Many other gardeners reacted the same way. In the end the association settled for looking at proof that an insurance contract exists without recording additional details. Note that no online advertising platforms were involved, the data subjects were not exactly technically literate (most are retirees) and GDPR helped them greatly to protect their privacy. The nice thing about GDPR is that all non-essential data collection needs to be opt-in, so if someone doesn't understand the implications of a choice presented to them, they can simply refuse to agree without negative consequences. How many people accidentally opt-in to being tracked for advertising when they have to individually allow each advertiser to do so?

Angostura 8y ago

> They don't understand the implications and expecting them to is silly. Part pf the GDPR is a requirement that such things are spelled out explicitly in clear language.

DanBC 8y ago

Permission is one basis for lawful processing. There are others. A bunch of websites have been mislead into thinking that GDPR forces them to get permission for everything, or that them having permission allows them to do what they want. They are wrong.