4 ms·

I'd go further, with a ban on possession of the data, with a provision for statutory damages.

Teever 9mo ago
We could just start to enforce the laws as they're written. If I was to follow a stranger as closely as an entitty like Facebook or Google does and compiled a dossier on that stranger in many countries that would be considered stalking and would be illegal. Incorporating and doing the same thing to society en masse doesn't somehow make it legal despite it somehow makes people disinclined to prosecute.
- analog31 9mo ago
  I think people are disinclined to prosecute because the odds are stacked against them. I'm thinking of an analogy, and I've mentioned this before in other threads. The concept of statutory damages, as I'm thinking of it, is that a certain level of damages are automatically awarded. For instance this is used for figuring out damages when songs are copied illegally. It eliminates the need to construct a unique legal theory and case for each and every instance. In this case it benefits the record companies, which is of course controversial, but something like it could also benefit consumers. If a company is found to possess your data, they automatically pay you X dollars, enough to make it a deterrent. You sign up with a law form that specializes in these cases, and they get a share of the damages.
mwcz 9mo ago
An environment like that is where SOLID, or something like it, could thrive.
badcryptobitch 9mo ago
You can still derive a lot of info without having possession of the data through the use of PETs. There's a reason why companies like Google and Tik Tok make heavy use of PETs for their advertising products.
- gruez 9mo ago
  "PETs"?
  - tartoran 9mo ago
    Yeah, I have no idea what this acronym stands for.
    - card_zero 9mo ago
      I found "Privacy Enhancing Technologies". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy-enhancing_technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy-enhancing_technologies
  - JamesTRexx 9mo ago
    So that's how my CAT and DOG aquired their new shiny toys. They sold my info.

We could just start to enforce the laws as they're written. If I was to follow a stranger as closely as an entitty like Facebook or Google does and compiled a dossier on that stranger in many countries that would be considered stalking and would be illegal. Incorporating and doing the same thing to society en masse doesn't somehow make it legal despite it somehow makes people disinclined to prosecute.

analog31 9mo ago
I think people are disinclined to prosecute because the odds are stacked against them. I'm thinking of an analogy, and I've mentioned this before in other threads. The concept of statutory damages, as I'm thinking of it, is that a certain level of damages are automatically awarded. For instance this is used for figuring out damages when songs are copied illegally. It eliminates the need to construct a unique legal theory and case for each and every instance. In this case it benefits the record companies, which is of course controversial, but something like it could also benefit consumers. If a company is found to possess your data, they automatically pay you X dollars, enough to make it a deterrent. You sign up with a law form that specializes in these cases, and they get a share of the damages.

mwcz 9mo ago

An environment like that is where SOLID, or something like it, could thrive.

badcryptobitch 9mo ago

You can still derive a lot of info without having possession of the data through the use of PETs. There's a reason why companies like Google and Tik Tok make heavy use of PETs for their advertising products.

gruez 9mo ago
"PETs"?
- tartoran 9mo ago
  Yeah, I have no idea what this acronym stands for.
  - card_zero 9mo ago
    I found "Privacy Enhancing Technologies". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy-enhancing_technologies https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Privacy-enhancing_technologies
- JamesTRexx 9mo ago
  So that's how my CAT and DOG aquired their new shiny toys. They sold my info.