Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

This is just an author wishlist and not the reality. I especially find the "clearing house" fantasy amusing. How he thinks this house of bureaucrats will be able to judge that John Does complaint has any merit?


I recognized your user name from the other thread (https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17095217), it looks like you've made up your mind (to the point where your comments where ridiculous enough to be deleted) and no amount of argument will even get you to consider any other options.

Why don't you tell us how you really feel?


And the author of this article, who was also very active in the same thread hasn't made up his mind?


I am only trying to understand why people feel so easy about it. I read hundreds of articles on the topic and nobody really has a clue what is going to happen. That my comments were deemed ridiculous and deleted is the symptom how crazy this whole thing is.


How he thinks this house of bureaucrats will be able to judge that John Does complaint has any merit?

The same way judges can throw out a case without going to trial. Checking if the complaint makes sense, if it represents an actual violation as described, etc. Anyone dealing with the public knows that a huge chunk of the complaints don't even pass that bar.


John Doe says company has personal information on him and doesn't want to delete it. Shows email exchange with the company and company is stating they don't have his personal data, so there is nothing to delete. How do they judge the case has a merit? Let's say a group forms on xchan type of site and flood company and "clearing house" with such claims.


Unless Doe can provide any actual reason for believing they have his data, and as long as the data handling process of the company is sound, the regulator will just close the issue. At least that's my experience.

Remember that the Data Protection Directive, which already allows citizens to ask companies if they have data on them and to correct incorrect data, has been around from 1995, yet there hasn't been any mobs ruining companies.


What reason could anyone provide? (even that a company like fb still has your data) Or that a company sold it illegally? Or that random targeted ads you are seeing are the result of data from any particular company?


John Doe could say he had an account with company website. He can't log in because he has got shadow blocked. There would be dozens of such claims .


Plus it gives easy access to the government to peek at your data without any significant clause. Your data are theirs too now.


That's not how it works. They don't send a guy to look at your databases.


So how do they know if the response with the data a user requests, are all we've got about them, and if indeed where stored the proper way?


Generally they don't, until something happens that reveals the contrary. Like the Cambridge Analytica fiasco.


As far as I know, you pay for an audit yourself, and then you send them the results.


How difficult would be to pay auditor to close their eyes? Do you need another audit?


Sorry, I don't know the details.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: