5 ms·
Maybe this is a cynical, defeatist approach, but I operate under the assumption that if I've ever put data out there, it's already been sucked up by multiple da
by dfxm12 3y ago
Maybe this is a cynical, defeatist approach, but I operate under the assumption that if I've ever put data out there, it's already been sucked up by multiple databases & deleting it from the source would be meaningless.
- EvanAnderson 3y agoYours is the only reasonable attitude. Given companies' track records preventing data breaches you're right to assume that any data about you being stored is effectively stored indefinitely.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoWhen the penalty barely reaches the level of "speeding ticket", there is no incentive for them to comply.
- gingerlime 3y agothe penalty can be significant under GDPR, but enforcement is lacking severely
- EvanAnderson 3y agoMalicious attackers don't have to comply with GDPR. Even the best steward is one data breach away from public disclosure.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoAnd this is why egregiously stupid handling of immutable PHI/PPI/PCI should have genuine penalties. 140 million people had their entire credit reports/history and all associated information released to the world because Equifax thought having it all accessible, publicly, without changing the goddamn default password was a good idea. The penalty? Profits. They immediately bought a credit monitoring agency, then gave everyone 24 months of monitoring, for a lifelong problem. After that 24 months, a large number of people starting paying for the service, because it's a lifelong fucking problem. Equifax is still in business today, still hoovering up all of that data, with zero recourse by the consumer and when they fucked it up, they made money. We don't have to worry about bad actors. We have companies doing it for them, happily.
- sonicanatidae 3y agoThat's a distinction without a difference.
- Dalewyn 3y agoThe internet never forgets, as the old saying goes.
- svachalek 3y agoLike most defeatist attitudes, it's taking a realistic fact and then drawing the wrong conclusion. No point washing the dishes, they're just going to get dirty again. No point wearing a seatbelt, we all die sometime. Etc etc.
- kjkjadksj 3y agoThey aren’t wrong about everything being crawled though in this case.
- pettycashstash2 3y agoHow do you assume defeatist attitude? My time is more valuable than to spend hours filling out removal forms. Doing the removal has zero measurable perceived if not actual benefit to me. If someone wants the data there are n ways to get it. I spend my time on more value add activities
- tremon 3y agoHow do you assume defeatist attitude? Might have something to do with the GP's choice of words: > Maybe this is a cynical, defeatist approach
- dfxm12 3y agoIt would be helpful to learn possible correct conclusions in this specific case, if I've jumped to a wrong one.
- ryandrake 3y agoYou should not only assume that anything you put onto the Internet will get sucked up by companies and become un-deletable, you should assume that it will eventually be freely searchable by anyone, including your spouse, employer, neighbors, worst enemy, and so on... because breaches happen all the time. People should also understand that "put onto the Internet" doesn't just mean typing something into a box and hitting the "post" button. It also means: - "Private" messages that go through an intermediary web service - All forms of cloud storage, including (especially) your photos - Any browsing history that can be associated with an IP address that can be tied back to you A lot of this stuff is one leaked password or SIM swap away from being public data.