3 ms·

Yeah but what is a leak ? Do you consider it a leak when a data transfer to another company is intentional ? Companies like Google are probably secured like fo

• pasabagi 5y ago
  Well, my suggestion is kind of aiming to be as pragmatic and unambitious as possible, so the fact it doesn't have an effect against giants who spend a lot of money on security is part of the pragmatism - it means you split the opposition a bill like this would face. The big companies would see it as a way to expand their moat, and so, they'd probably lobby for it, or at least, you could convince them not to lobby against it. If you can build a big coalition of people for whom privacy is something important, then you can start making ambitious policy proposals because you'll have the voters to back it up. Before that point, I think you have to try for easy wins.
• inetknght 5y ago
  > Yeah but what is a leak? Any time someone who's not me or a direct party to a transaction or conversation learns something about me then that is a "leak". > Do you consider it a leak when a data transfer to another company is intentional? If I do business with my bank then the bank should have no right to sell my information to a third party for any reason whatsoever. If I do business with my hair stylist then the credit card processor should not have any right whatsoever to do anything with the facts: - where was the hair stylist? That's private. - who was the hair stylist? That's private. - when was I at the hair stylist? That's private. - what did the hair stylist sell? That's private. - why did I go to the hair stylist? That's private. Nobody except my hair stylist and myself should have this information.
  • jefftk 5y ago
    > someone who's not me or a direct party to a transaction or conversation It sounds to me like this definition strongly promotes consolidation. The bigger a party is, the more information it would be allowed to have and the more ways it can use it to cross-sell. > If I do business with my hair stylist then the credit card processor should not have any right whatsoever to do anything with the facts... Should the credit card company be allowed to use the information about your transaction to assess how likely it is that someone has stolen your card?
    • inetknght 5y ago
      > Should the credit card company be allowed to use the information about your transaction to assess how likely it is that someone has stolen your card? I've been called by the credit card company many times for failed transactions that I've authorized. When fraud did occur then I was not contacted by my card company and I had only noticed the fraud because I actively monitor my card. The credit card company should be able to determine what it wants without providing the information to any other entity. No, I do not think that the credit card company should be permitted to sell the information about my transaction under the guise of determining how likely it is that someone has stolen my card.
      • jefftk 5y ago
        > I've been called by the credit card company many times for failed transactions that I've authorized. When fraud did occur then I was not contacted by my card company and I had only noticed the fraud because I actively monitor my card. Yes, credit card antifraud has both false positives and false negatives. It's not clear to me whether you're going from there to saying that it is useless? > I do not think that the credit card company should be permitted to sell the information about my transaction under the guise of determining how likely it is that someone has stolen my card. I think I misunderstood you earlier. When you wrote "the credit card processor should not have any right whatsoever to do anything with the facts..." I thought you meant that they shouldn't be allowed to use the credit card data to do anything, including fraud prevention, not just that they shouldn't be allowed to sell it?
  • alisonkisk 5y ago
    Are you also going to make gossip illegal? Are customer reviews going to be illegal?