General Data Protection Regulation (“GDPR”) ⚖

1385 readers

2 users here now

Everything related to the #GDPR is discussed here. This is the first and only community specifically for GDPR topics which is decentralized and outside of walled-gardens. #EDPB recommendations and guidance can and should also be discussed here.

For the moment, chatter on the similar California Consumer Privacy Act (CCPA) could be discussed at least until the volume of messages compels us to split it into a separate community.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz

Google criticizes Europe's plan to adopt free software -- this abuses a GDPR hole that FOSS compensates for (sopuli.xyz)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz to c/gdpr@sopuli.xyz

9 comments fedilink hide all child comments

GDPR Art.5 and other parts try to guarantee data subjects transparency on how their data is processed. The overlooked problem is when a data subject installs a closed-source app, they have no idea how their personal data is being processed inside that black box. And since the processing is performed by the data subject themself, they have no legal mechanism to become informed on how the data is processed.

FOSS solves this. FOSS is a crutch for a GDPR hole. Google’s advocacy is an assault on data protection. Yet they have the audacity to claim closed-source s/w gives a data protection benefit.

(update) Closed-source licenses → extra perverse

The last license agreement I read for a closed-source phone app prohibited studying the app or reverse-engineering it. So not only are data subjects technologically blocked from transparency on how their data is processed, they are also contractually blocked from even trying.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

That probably includes anyone with a retirement account. It must require quite some effort to pick funds that exclude Alphabet Inc.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago (1 children)

bullshit, leaving one failing stock that's about to lose a huge market is just a smart idea.

[–] freedomPusher@sopuli.xyz 1 points 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) (1 children)

A “fund” is not an individual stock. A fund is a huge collection of stocks managed by someone else. I have had retirement accounts where I just get tick boxes like: aggressive, conservative, and moderate. If you look at the docs for a mutual fund, typically only their 10 biggest holdings are disclosed. They don’t bother to list the other 500+ holdings.

I would love to specify corporations who I want to blacklist and require funds to be filtered on that, but I have never seen an investment tool that has such a thing. If you find one, please let me know.

This person has the right idea:

https://sopuli.xyz/post/41286109

Of course to get that level of purity means ditching all mutual funds and other managed funds and just picking unmanaged/specific investments. Which he suggests could be a full-time job.

[–] IAmNorRealTakeYourMeds@lemmy.world 1 points 3 days ago

let's be clear here.

the USA has been threatening a war against Europe.

Getting rid of USA based services is a matter of national safety. not just a discussion of stock values or economy.

And EU using EU based resources just makes sense.