3 ms·
You’re responding to a point that the parent isn‘t making. Enabling collaboration doesn’t mean AI training, exposing data within an organization doesn’t requir
by makeitdouble 4y ago
You’re responding to a point that the parent isn‘t making.
Enabling collaboration doesn’t mean AI training, exposing data within an organization doesn’t require MS to be scanning it, and their servers don’t need to be in the US. It makes business sense for them to do so, but isn’t a requirement per se.
- Closi 4y agoI think their point is the definition of "processing" would also likely cover collaboration (i.e. you could stop AI training etc but you still wouldn't be compliant)
- kyrra 4y agoAgreed. When things are web hosted, there's all kinds of processing. Still. Spam filter, searching email history, even loading an email is considered processing the email. I believe both Google and Microsoft try to firewall any Enterprise or business data from their consumer lines. This means none of it will get fed into AI filters for the most part. Though I'm guessing marking things is spam still is a global thing.
- BlueTemplar 4y agoSchrems 1 goes even farther than that... the issue is the potential access by the US government of the EU data through strongarming Microsoft (or other US companies), which is in violation of EU rights. There's no way around this issue while Microsoft-spawned EU companies are still part of Microsoft. I guess they could still sell open source software (to prove there are no backdoors, otherwise, after the Snowden scandal you have to assume that there are by default) that doesn't get to run on Microsoft's servers and that Microsoft doesn't provide technical support for... but how can this be a business ??
- makeitdouble 4y agoThis looks to me to be a fairly solved problem, Gitlab can be instances you manage yourself and there is no specific limitations on what works on your self hosted ones. Microsoft provides server software for Outlook, ActiveDirectory, Sharepoint and the whole org management stack that doesn’t need Microsoft meddling with the data. Office365 shouldn’t be some wildly different software that can’t live outside of Microsoft’s full grasp.
- Closi 4y agoThe difference is that Outlook, AD & Sharepoint were all designed to be deployed on-premises as an option from the start. Most of 365 appears to be designed and architected to be a multi-tenanted SaaS solution, so I suspect it's not anywhere near as simple as just spinning up your own 365 instance. 365 is probably thousands of microservices behind the scenes which all have their own unique infrastructure requirements and will be actively managed by Microsoft. I suspect running these in your own datacentre would not be an easy feat without complete re-engineering by Microsoft.
- makeitdouble 4y ago> without complete re-engineering by Microsoft We come to the same conclusion: Microsoft chose a different way for Office 365 where it could provide the service to more consumers while also keep way more control, in particular making it easier to justify recurring subscriptions at large. It goes hand in hand with their cloud efforts and pushing for more services, so I understand the motivation. I also kinda wish this trend stopped.
- Closi 4y agoIt's also a different architectural model - i.e. why don't we also have the options of privately hosted versions of Google Docs? Licencing might be one reason, but deployment complexity is probably the bigger reason.
- josefx 4y agoExcept nobody has their definition of processing. I think some German working group also rejected Office 365 because they could not nail Microsoft down on what "processing" means and targeting minors with overly broad agreements when schools are already operating under stricter than normal data processing constraints is a no go even if your name isn't Epstein.
- Kiro 4y agoParent had no point since they fundamentally misunderstand what data processing is, and so are you.