Yep that app is definitely not a privacy nightmare. No.
this post was submitted on 04 Jul 2023
1 points (100.0% liked)
Technology
104 readers
2 users here now
This magazine is dedicated to discussions on the latest developments, trends, and innovations in the world of technology. Whether you are a tech enthusiast, a developer, or simply curious about the latest gadgets and software, this is the place for you. Here you can share your knowledge, ask questions, and engage in discussions on topics such as artificial intelligence, robotics, cloud computing, cybersecurity, and more. From the impact of technology on society to the ethical considerations of new technologies, this category covers a wide range of topics related to technology. Join the conversation and let's explore the ever-evolving world of technology together!
founded 2 years ago
Man I hate undefined acronyms
The real question though is, how compatible they are with CCPA? Will CA's SCOCA be also as harsh as EU's CJEU?
Do you think there's any chance?
I know next to nothing about California law, but it seems like this would be extremely aggressive towards what's essentially a huge industry in California. Privacy concerns also seem to me to be less important in the US - if anything there might be a preference for the storage of data due to stuff like the Patriot Act?
Then again, California has the capability to surprise.
Sorry about that - GDPR is short for General Data Protection Regulation, and it's basically an EU regulation determining what businesses are allowed to do with the data of their users.
What businesses are allowed to do with user data boils down to pretty much nothing without consent: Individuals need to have control over their data and have it removed if they feel like it, you can't just ship user data out of the EU just like that, you can't store user data without explicit consent, etc. It caused a huge shock in European industry when it was first passed, as basically not a single company was meeting the standards of what we now refer to as being GDPR compliant. I had a friend working in some random flower shop who got a bunch of extra work because their repeat customer programme was suddenly becoming illegal.
The case before the CJEU - the Court of Justice of the European Union - revolved around the terms and conditions of Facebook. Meta did not want to conventionally comply with GDPR because it turns out users will generally refuse to give consent if you go ahead and ask them. Insted they came up with a dumb loophole: the ads were framed as part of their service, and their terms of service obliged Facebook to serve people ads that would otherwise have been in breach with GDPR.
Predictably, the European court was not convinced by their "loophole", and basically ruled that Meta has to comply with GDPR like anyone else.
I hope that clarified a little! :)