3 ms·

> “This is the latest chapter in a disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly transforming search warrants into digital dragnets. It’s uncon

> “This is the latest chapter in a disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly transforming search warrants into digital dragnets. It’s unconstitutional, it’s terrifying and it’s happening every day,” said Albert Fox-Cahn, executive director at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project. If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem. Instead, we have sites not being ashamed in informing you about literally thousands of external ad broker, tracking, notifications and whatnotelse integrations. To u/decremental: you seem to be shadowbanned, here's an Archive link: https://archive.ph/kAXQ1 https://archive.ph/kAXQ1

pvg 3y ago
They are just banned https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995962 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995962
- pierat 3y ago
  One in the same on HN.
  - pvg 3y ago
    It's not shadowban if you're told you're banned and it doesn't come from the Shadoban region of Japan.
- j33zusjuice 3y ago
  How is a banned account making visible comments? Also, how did you find that post?
  - rootusrootus 3y ago
    You can see dead comments by enabling showdead in your HN profile.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- wging 3y ago
  The comment in question appears in incognito mode. I don't think they're banned.
  - pvg 3y ago
    The comment got vouched to life.
- decremental 3y ago
  That's true, I'm just banned but it still lets me comment and that's fine with me. No pesky fake internet points to worry about.
  - balls187 3y ago
    This account is the Illuminati.
loeg 3y ago
> If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem. Saving user watch history is useful for users. Sure, make it optional, but I find it really useful that youtube shows me if I've already watched a video, and that I can find recently seen videos in my watch history.
- boppo1 3y ago
  There should really be levels of history. I don't want youtube keeping every video I've ever watched on file, so I have history off. However, now, if I leave a video and come back to it the next day, my place in the video is lost. Lemme specify the length of time to keep history pls.
  - kvmet 3y ago
    Why does allowing them to store your watch history mean that they MUST also share it with 3rd parties? Why isn't "I want _you_ to know but I don't want you to use it against me." an option?
    - ddingus 3y ago
      Because dollars. Being able to sell histories means being able to sell supposedly more effective ADS. Also shows ads were viewed and by whom. Precision of any kind in demographics is worth a lot of money.
      - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
        As far as I can tell this is just the truth, so I'm curious who downvoted and why. Guilty consciences?
        loeg 3y ago
        It conflates data collection with selling data. Google, Meta, etc do not sell their users' data (for purely commercial reasons).
throwaway237289 3y ago
> If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem. This is ridiculous. Literally the authorities are the one demanding information, so that they can abuse that power. And you're blaming the people with information? Stop fighting the wrong war: hold the people with power accountable. That's the government here. They can use force and put you in jail. That's power.
- tomrod 3y ago
  Both, not either.
- kevinmchugh 3y ago
  Anyone collecting data needs to consider how the data can be misused. Whether that be by a (repressive) government, a hacker, or a future purchaser of the data
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

pvg 3y ago

They are just banned https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995962 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=35995962

pierat 3y ago
One in the same on HN.
- pvg 3y ago
  It's not shadowban if you're told you're banned and it doesn't come from the Shadoban region of Japan.
j33zusjuice 3y ago
How is a banned account making visible comments? Also, how did you find that post?
- rootusrootus 3y ago
  You can see dead comments by enabling showdead in your HN profile.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
wging 3y ago
The comment in question appears in incognito mode. I don't think they're banned.
- pvg 3y ago
  The comment got vouched to life.
decremental 3y ago
That's true, I'm just banned but it still lets me comment and that's fine with me. No pesky fake internet points to worry about.
- balls187 3y ago
  This account is the Illuminati.

loeg 3y ago

> If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem. Saving user watch history is useful for users. Sure, make it optional, but I find it really useful that youtube shows me if I've already watched a video, and that I can find recently seen videos in my watch history.

boppo1 3y ago
There should really be levels of history. I don't want youtube keeping every video I've ever watched on file, so I have history off. However, now, if I leave a video and come back to it the next day, my place in the video is lost. Lemme specify the length of time to keep history pls.
- kvmet 3y ago
  Why does allowing them to store your watch history mean that they MUST also share it with 3rd parties? Why isn't "I want _you_ to know but I don't want you to use it against me." an option?
  - ddingus 3y ago
    Because dollars. Being able to sell histories means being able to sell supposedly more effective ADS. Also shows ads were viewed and by whom. Precision of any kind in demographics is worth a lot of money.
    - CatWChainsaw 3y ago
      As far as I can tell this is just the truth, so I'm curious who downvoted and why. Guilty consciences?
      - loeg 3y ago
        It conflates data collection with selling data. Google, Meta, etc do not sell their users' data (for purely commercial reasons).

throwaway237289 3y ago

> If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem. This is ridiculous. Literally the authorities are the one demanding information, so that they can abuse that power. And you're blaming the people with information? Stop fighting the wrong war: hold the people with power accountable. That's the government here. They can use force and put you in jail. That's power.

tomrod 3y ago
Both, not either.
kevinmchugh 3y ago
Anyone collecting data needs to consider how the data can be misused. Whether that be by a (repressive) government, a hacker, or a future purchaser of the data

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]