“If adopted, these amendments would not simplify compliance but hollow out the GDPR’s and ePrivacy’s core guarantees: purpose limitation, accountability, and independent oversight,” Itxaso Dominguez de Olazabal, from the European Digital Rights group, told EUobserver.
The draft includes adjustments to what is considered “personal data,” a key component of the GDPR and protected by Article 8 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.
You know what would be good? If the browser asked you what you wanted to share, and then that was it. You didnt get asked by every single fucking website to accept fucking cookies. The website asks the browser, the browser tells them, and its all done. If youre gonna make changes, make that change.
This is what ‘do not track’ was for.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Do_Not_Track
It didn’t work because it was up to the sites to read and respect the flag, which they did not.
do not track was a “pweeease mister serwer uwu”-sorta move. there was no legal basis for it, and there was no technical backing. it would have been simple easy for browsers to just not send stuff that can be tracked (just check the eff panopticon site for how much superfluous stuff is just sent by the browser with every request), but instead the industry opted for the easier “here’s all my stuff just as it was, and a little note that says ‘don’t look’”. do not track was always a joke.
Not to kiss the boot of the Tim Cook led, fascist supporting corporation that is Apple. However, the IOS ecosystem does this. That “Ask App Not To Track” is deceptive in that it actually prevents a lot of data collection, though the “Ask” portion is hinged on the fact that Apple can not control everything an app does on their server side. You can configure, via your device settings, to always and automatically respond with “Yes” to this regardless of which app is asking.
Well we had the “do not track” header but almost everyone ignored it, and in the end it was removed from most browsers because ironically it just made tracking people easier.
It’s a constant fight to keep personal data private. This is so fucked up.
I find the proposed amendments to Article 9 particularly problematic … And perfectly in line with AI bros telling you to make AI chatbots your friends while seeing them harvesting suicidal thoughts, self-reported depression symptoms and body dysmorphia.
It seems as though the elite is very motivated to win this battle. We will have to ditch every public platform, start self hosting and encrypt sensitive documents locally with PGP.
I hate the future so far.
You describe a future with truer security guarantees, not a façade of trust and legal obscurities. A future where the consumer stands up to the bully by preventing their extortion, not by trusting the bully to fall in suit. That’s a future I can get behind, it sounds much less volatile. It sounds like consumers have some smidge of control for once.
Lest we forget, the platforms we build and use should prioritize security and transparency. It’s not like everyone will need to be an expert on protocols for secure peer to peer communication.
Privacy is eroding. For the sellout of citizen data. F**king great.
Removed by mod
This is an AI bot. Please report them.
You can tell because there are a lot of instances of “X and Y”:
- GDPR and ePrivacy
- private companies and state actors
- dangerous and morally obscene [who talks like this?]
- big tech and ad firms
- regulators and courts
- industry capture and political cowardice
- national DPAs [what even is that?] and journalists
The message is solid though.
Thanks, that’s a very good observation.
The meaning of “DPA” is clear to everyone participating in discussions about GDPR, though. It is a pretty big deal in the EU.
“Industry capture,” OTOH, is a very American talking point.
Sadly, you need to be very oblivious to what is going on for years to be surprised by this shit.
Paywalled, so thanks for the arch link!
deleted by creator
