AlexanderHanff

6 ms·

31.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
Absolute nonsense. Any company that was complying with the old Data Protection Directive should have had zero issues upgrading their processes and policies to comply with GDPR there are very few material differences between the two and the
32.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
It can be appealed but because it is cross border it has to be appealed directly at the Oslo Court (rather than the privacy claims board) and also the fact they had the fine reduced for co-operation usually includes a clause that they will
33.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
It is not just the fine - they are no longer permitted to conduct the processing activities - so no they don't continue to profit from it, one of the reasons the fine was reduced was specifically because they made changes to bring them
34.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
You are making assumptions, I have a very good relationship with the Norwegian DPA and discussed the case with them several times over the past 4 years.
35.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
Well John Edwards just resigned yesterday so maybe you will get a real Commissioner this time - although that said, John was hired specifically as someone who would do nothing, so I guess he did what he was paid to do. He has largely been o
36.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
There are currently 22 US States with comprehensive privacy laws with Louisiana being the latest (their Governor signed just last week iirc) and the 23rd is literally a Governor's signature away (just passed the state senate).
37.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
The fine is largely irrelevant, now they have faced enforcement we have a decision to file a Representative Actions Directive (equivalent of a US class action) claim with - the cost of that will be 100-1000x more than the fine and will like
38.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
It was not their responsibility to keep me informed, it was the responsibility of IMY (the Swedish Regulator) to keep me informed.
39.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
If you click the image, it flips to reveal the prompt and other metadata. The blog is running on a Mac Mini on a 1Gb/s uplink so when it gets hit with a front page HN post, it does creak a little but I try to be environmentally respons
40.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
I have had several direct discussion with the Norwegian DPA throughout the case, the inspection and investigation were triggered by the IMY cross border case and I have not "sued" the regulator (neither do I say I have) I have fil
41.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
You might well think it is reasonable, but the law doesn't permit this, it is explicit that the person has an absolute right not to be subjected to direct marketing activities (Article 21 of the GDPR) and Article 5 of the GDPR requires
42.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
It is a translation thing - what they said in Norwegian was that it is required to accept marketing activities if you want to be part of the loyalty club - but the machine translation did it literally instead of changing the structure to ma
43.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
That simply isn't possible - you might like to think you read everything but research has shown that simply reading the terms and conditions of the top 100 websites amounts to a colossal amount of time (if you look at Prof. Lorie Crano
44.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
Which is exactly the point - under Article 21 of the GDPR every person has a legal right not to be subjected to direct marketing so any forced direct marketing is unlawful and consent cannot be bundled (it must be specific under the GDPR) s
45.
Amazon Ring's Familiar Faces – Perfect Privacy and Environmental Storm(thatprivacyguy.com)
2 points by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago|1 comments
46.
by AlexanderHanff 4mo ago
In my latest article I discuss the legal issues spanning Privacy, Data Protection, Consumer Protection, Unfair Contract Terms and the EU's Environmental Crime Directive with Amazon's "Familiar Faces" feature in high end
47.
by AlexanderHanff 5mo ago
My apologies I wasnt aware, I just had an email in my inbox this morning alerting me to the Reddit post so decided to write up a followup article and given the interest in the topic here, wanted to post the update. That said, i do go in to
48.
Google removes privacy assurances after stuffing devices with their AI model(thatprivacyguy.com)
5 points by AlexanderHanff 5mo ago|3 comments
49.
by AlexanderHanff 5mo ago
It seems that Google have decided it was not enough to breach the GDPR, ePrivacy Directive and Crminal Statutes relating to unauthorised access and use of computing devices - they have now decided to open themselves up to Consumer Protectio
50.
by AlexanderHanff 5mo ago
I am a computer scientist and have studied AI for over 30 years, I use AI every single day and I speak all over the world about the responsible and ethical use of AI... not sure how that makes me anti-ai? I am a privacy activist and I stron
51.
by AlexanderHanff 5mo ago
First of all I want to thank you for your intelligent and reasoned post. As the author of the article in question, I have been mostly shocked at how many people are excusing this behaviour and playing Google Apologist. Now to answer your qu