4 ms·

They've got 30 days to delete data, there's no excuse not to manage it within 30 days. Also, you're saying they intentionally built a software stack without ev

They've got 30 days to delete data, there's no excuse not to manage it within 30 days. Also, you're saying they intentionally built a software stack without even thinking about how to obey the law (the 30-day deletion requirement existed even before the GDPR, since 1996 even, just with lower fines) I hope in a few years this case will be taught in school just like the Therac case is being taught right now.

holidayacct 6y ago
It's not that simple, some of these companies have tech stacks that are run-a-way trains written by people who had good intentions but wrote their code and built their infrastructure in a way that was meant for 1/50th of the traffic they currently have. I don't know anything about instagram's infrastructure but what I can tell you for certain is that every one of these companies has legacy infrastructure and code that keeps them from being able to meet all legal requirements. You can't just make a blanket statement that they don't have an excuse.
- s1t5 6y ago
  > I don't know anything about instagram's infrastructure but what I can tell you for certain is that every one of these companies has legacy infrastructure So you don't know anything about Instagram but at the same time know for certain that they have legacy infrastructure that keeps them from meeting legal requirements? How about we don't give them a pass just because it requires a bit of work to comply with laws and regulations.
  - holidayacct 6y ago
    Maybe its just me but I have yet to work for a company that didnt have legacy infrastructure that was hold them back in some way. Even the startups I've worked for had to make odd business decisions in order to take on new customers. Those odd one-offs and business decisions eventually led to sprawling legacy infrastructure. If there is an infrastructure Utopia I have yet to work there or hear of it.
- ethanwillis 6y ago
  If they don't want to comply with laws then they shouldn't be operating.
- LunaSea 6y ago
  That really isn't the user's problem. Laws and rules need to be followed no matter what. It's the same with GDPR.
  - holidayacct 6y ago
    And this is the attitude that causes businesses to tell lies about everything they are doing. If you want transparency with regard to how you're data is being handled you need to ease up a bit and realize there are biological limitations to how fast people can make changes. Most of these companies have people who want to fix these problems. They just have hurdles you don't know about, some of them are internal politics and others are technical.
- vageli 6y ago
  These companies are shipping new features every day. If they have the bandwidth to work on those projects then the failure to meet legal requirements is an issue of prioritization, leaving no excuse.
- tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago
  Then they have to stop adding new features, and focus their countless developers on implementing a way to meet these legal requirements. And the fines for not doing that need to be big enough to motivate them to do that.

holidayacct 6y ago

It's not that simple, some of these companies have tech stacks that are run-a-way trains written by people who had good intentions but wrote their code and built their infrastructure in a way that was meant for 1/50th of the traffic they currently have. I don't know anything about instagram's infrastructure but what I can tell you for certain is that every one of these companies has legacy infrastructure and code that keeps them from being able to meet all legal requirements. You can't just make a blanket statement that they don't have an excuse.

s1t5 6y ago
> I don't know anything about instagram's infrastructure but what I can tell you for certain is that every one of these companies has legacy infrastructure So you don't know anything about Instagram but at the same time know for certain that they have legacy infrastructure that keeps them from meeting legal requirements? How about we don't give them a pass just because it requires a bit of work to comply with laws and regulations.
- holidayacct 6y ago
  Maybe its just me but I have yet to work for a company that didnt have legacy infrastructure that was hold them back in some way. Even the startups I've worked for had to make odd business decisions in order to take on new customers. Those odd one-offs and business decisions eventually led to sprawling legacy infrastructure. If there is an infrastructure Utopia I have yet to work there or hear of it.
ethanwillis 6y ago
If they don't want to comply with laws then they shouldn't be operating.
LunaSea 6y ago
That really isn't the user's problem. Laws and rules need to be followed no matter what. It's the same with GDPR.
- holidayacct 6y ago
  And this is the attitude that causes businesses to tell lies about everything they are doing. If you want transparency with regard to how you're data is being handled you need to ease up a bit and realize there are biological limitations to how fast people can make changes. Most of these companies have people who want to fix these problems. They just have hurdles you don't know about, some of them are internal politics and others are technical.
vageli 6y ago
These companies are shipping new features every day. If they have the bandwidth to work on those projects then the failure to meet legal requirements is an issue of prioritization, leaving no excuse.
tgsovlerkhgsel 6y ago
Then they have to stop adding new features, and focus their countless developers on implementing a way to meet these legal requirements. And the fines for not doing that need to be big enough to motivate them to do that.