Home Off Topic

50 million Facebook accounts hacked

2»

Replies

  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    edited October 2018 #32
    Balla,

    Fines don't need to go to the "hacked persons" in order for corporate behavior to change, no more that fines for criminal behavior need to go to those who were the victim of a crime.  They are deterrence to bad behavior, and they are extremely effective in changing corporate behavior.

    I'm sorry, but I don't "trust you" because I've seen, first hand, a change in behavior by corporations, including the one I work for.  Indeed, I'm part of the group that has and is negotiating these contractual changes and am deeply involved in the legal and operational constructs that result from GDPR.

    Furthermore, the existing rules didn't address -- at all -- any data that resides outside of the EU.  More to the point, had GDPR not been enabled, and to the extent the Facebook data is in the US, the older regulations would not have applied at all.

    And that's setting aside all the rights of the individuals that were protected under this regulation:  Data must be processed in a transparent fashion (consent must be given), collected and used for a specific purpose and only that purpose while maintaining that data in an accurate, secure manner until such time its specific purpose of use has expired. It must then be deleted.

    Now, you bring up a point about the clashing of the right to be forgotten and the regulations on data retention due to financial reporting.  On this point GDPR is clear, the underlying legislation for retention takes precedence on that data, provided it is collected and stored as per the regulation, and the stronger right to be forgotten terms only apply for data outside the purview of financial reporting (for instance after 7 years required in the UK).   Frankly, anyone involved in GDPR should understand that, which suggests to me you're not as familiar with it as you suggest.

    Listen, you are certainly free to believe it's a useless bureaucracy, just as you are free to think it's a scam intended to fund the EU.   You are even free to be mistaken about the difference between GDRP and the earlier directives, and you are free to be unclear on the precedence of  GDPR versus financial transaction data retention policies.   None of that changes the way the companies affected by it are reacting to GDRP and their potential fines, which I speak to with first hand experience.

    But you don't have to trust me or believe me.  Look at the potential fine to Facebook under GDPR.  Look at the host of articles on the topic:


    Just don't expect me to "trust you" or "believe you" when you open the conversation with "it's all a scam", and nobody is talking about "broadcasting data everywhere on the web", but some of us are talking about how corporations that collect and use this data should do a better job of protecting it, and following the lead of the EU in this regard.

    Take care...Mike

  • BallaCoiPersiciBallaCoiPersici NW Italy (Laveno Mombello)Posts: 5,970 Admiral
    edited October 2018 #33
    No problem. If you are sure that GDPR will increase the people privacy it's ok to me.
    But according to what I experienced here in Italy (and in the other countries where my Group is in business) GDPR has been a huge cost for the companies, a huge cost that will not produce any significative result in terms of privacy protection and moreover is resulting a big gap for the free business (for not EU companies is mandatory, as you said, to apply GDPR in order to deal with EU companies).

    And, icing on the cake, try to guess who will pay the huge costs for applying GDPR: companies or companies' customers ? 
    Massimo (former Ballak) - Please, be patient for my English
    ********************************************************************************************************************************
    I'm typing keeping close my "pasta hole"!
    Political correctness is a mental disease that can put you in slavery. The only cure is to turn on the brain.
    I'm not afraid of Coravirus but I'm scared by the paranoid pandemic army who ask for the sanitary naz**m.
    Vulgus vult decipi, ergo decipiatur
  • surfmansurfman WC FLPosts: 5,982 Admiral
    More government, more government employees, less power to the people, that's what they want. They already outnumber us, it is just a matter of time.
    Tight Lines, Steve
    My posts are my opinion only.

    Be thankful we're not getting all the government we're paying for.  Will Rogers
  • TarponatorTarponator Under a BridgePosts: 17,010 AG
    No problem. If you are sure that GDPR will increase the people privacy it's ok to me.
    But according to what I experienced here in Italy (and in the other countries where my Group is in business) GDPR has been a huge cost for the companies, a huge cost that will not produce any significative result in terms of privacy protection and moreover is resulting a big gap for the free business (for not EU companies is mandatory, as you said, to apply GDPR in order to deal with EU companies).

    And, icing on the cake, try to guess who will pay the huge costs for applying GDPR: companies or companies' customers ? 
    There is a cost for corporations to implement GDPR.  Very true and a good criticism from where I sit.

    I'm happy to pay more and retain control over my data, and I could not disagree more that there is no value in it.

    And Surfman, this legislation puts more power in the hands of the people.  You are mistaken in this regard.
Sign In or Register to comment.