zlacker

[return to "Google ordered to identify who watched certain YouTube videos"]
1. mschus+k3[view] [source] 2024-03-23 01:52:14
>>wut42+(OP)
> “This is the latest chapter in a disturbing trend where we see government agencies increasingly transforming search warrants into digital dragnets. It’s unconstitutional, it’s terrifying and it’s happening every day,” said Albert Fox-Cahn, executive director at the Surveillance Technology Oversight Project.

If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem.

Instead, we have sites not being ashamed in informing you about literally thousands of external ad broker, tracking, notifications and whatnotelse integrations.

To u/decremental: you seem to be shadowbanned, here's an Archive link: https://archive.ph/kAXQ1

◧◩
2. loeg+k5[view] [source] 2024-03-23 02:15:38
>>mschus+k3
> If companies would respect the spirit behind GDPR and not store data that is not needed to fulfill a user's requests and protect the data that they must have in a way that makes dragnet searches impossible, this would not be a problem.

Saving user watch history is useful for users. Sure, make it optional, but I find it really useful that youtube shows me if I've already watched a video, and that I can find recently seen videos in my watch history.

◧◩◪
3. dpkirc+O7[view] [source] 2024-03-23 02:54:48
>>loeg+k5
I'd prefer to have that sort of thing stored locally, perhaps synced between all of my browsers/computers (directly, without storing the history unencrypted on servers).
◧◩◪◨
4. jart+r8[view] [source] 2024-03-23 03:02:51
>>dpkirc+O7
Even if Chrome did that, it wouldn't stop Edge from importing Chrome data and uploading it to Microsoft without asking permission.
[go to top]