3 ms·

> But yes, even better protection would be never collecting data you don't need in the first place. "Germans even have a word for it: Datensparsamkeit, the pri

by pgeorgi 11y ago

> But yes, even better protection would be never collecting data you don't need in the first place. "Germans even have a word for it: Datensparsamkeit, the principle of only collecting the bare minimum of data necessary." (http://qz.com/390988/germans-are-paranoid-that-the-us-is-spying-on-their-data/ http://qz.com/390988/germans-are-paranoid-that-the-us-is-spy...) Since the concept was established in 1983 by the constitutional court, there's probably a body of knowledge around that, just in the 'wrong' language and hence less known in the anglo-saxon culture.

icebraining 11y ago
The EU Data Protection Directive also pushes for that: "Member States shall provide that personal data must be (...) collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a way incompatible with those purposes [and must be] adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and/or further processed". http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:319...
Symbiote 11y ago
Britain has similar laws, of a similar age. We don't have a word for it, but I think there's an attitude that companies shouldn't be given more data than needed, and a suspicion when they ask. "Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed." [2] Which the guidance[1] explains as "So you should identify the minimum amount of personal data you need to properly fulfil your purpose. You should hold that much information, but no more. This is part of the practice known as “data minimisation”." [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/principle-3-adequacy/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1/part/I?view=plain http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1/part/...
- amelius 11y ago
  And how much data is google allowed to store about us? And why isn't the user allowed to specify the amount of bits that google store about us? There are 7 billion people on this planet. If I allow google to store at most 32 bits about me, then at least that data cannot uniquely identify me (roughly speaking).
GauntletWizard 11y ago
It's a pretty anti-science stance. Data is very rarely 'unnecessary'. The scientific method requires that you investigate and control as many variables as possible, because often things that you don't realize have far-reaching effects. Throwing that data away early is bad for your business, bad for your customers, and bad for society. No, I don't think companies should be aggregating all data without regard for consequences of breach, but nor do I believe that cutting data is the answer. Consumers, nee, people, need to learn that 'their' data is not so special snowflake, and that aggregate data is a fantastic tool for making their lives better.
- itsybitsycoder 11y ago
  Actually, the scientific method involves coming up with a hypothesis first and then collecting data for it. What you are suggesting is called data fishing and is a major flaw in many so-called "scientific" studies... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://xkcd.com/882/ https://xkcd.com/882/

by pgeorgi 11y ago

icebraining 11y ago

The EU Data Protection Directive also pushes for that: "Member States shall provide that personal data must be (...) collected for specified, explicit and legitimate purposes and not further processed in a way incompatible with those purposes [and must be] adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purposes for which they are collected and/or further processed". http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:31995L0046 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/en/TXT/?uri=CELEX:319...

Symbiote 11y ago

Britain has similar laws, of a similar age. We don't have a word for it, but I think there's an attitude that companies shouldn't be given more data than needed, and a suspicion when they ask. "Personal data shall be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose or purposes for which they are processed." [2] Which the guidance[1] explains as "So you should identify the minimum amount of personal data you need to properly fulfil your purpose. You should hold that much information, but no more. This is part of the practice known as “data minimisation”." [1] https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protection/principle-3-adequacy/ https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio... [2] http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1/part/I?view=plain http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1998/29/schedule/1/part/...

amelius 11y ago
And how much data is google allowed to store about us? And why isn't the user allowed to specify the amount of bits that google store about us? There are 7 billion people on this planet. If I allow google to store at most 32 bits about me, then at least that data cannot uniquely identify me (roughly speaking).

GauntletWizard 11y ago

It's a pretty anti-science stance. Data is very rarely 'unnecessary'. The scientific method requires that you investigate and control as many variables as possible, because often things that you don't realize have far-reaching effects. Throwing that data away early is bad for your business, bad for your customers, and bad for society. No, I don't think companies should be aggregating all data without regard for consequences of breach, but nor do I believe that cutting data is the answer. Consumers, nee, people, need to learn that 'their' data is not so special snowflake, and that aggregate data is a fantastic tool for making their lives better.

itsybitsycoder 11y ago
Actually, the scientific method involves coming up with a hypothesis first and then collecting data for it. What you are suggesting is called data fishing and is a major flaw in many so-called "scientific" studies... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data_dredging https://xkcd.com/882/ https://xkcd.com/882/