- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/52834195
“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.
If they’re already doing it then no change is necessary. So why change it?
If making it legal makes it easier for them to do, then that was my original point. That’s why I think they’re making the change.
Because laws are supposed to have teeth and consequences There is zero doubt that everything public on the internet or otherwise is consumed and aggregated by these companies; you still don’t understand why weakening regulations benefits them?
So you are saying that weakening these regulations makes it easier for these companies to train AI on that data?
That’s exactly what I’ve been saying all along too. I’m not sure what you think is being argued about here, or what you think I’m not understanding.
You’re the one asking questions about changing it
It’s clear that weaker regulations allow them to do more with impunity as I originally stated
No I’m not, I was explaining why I thought they changed it. You appeared to be arguing that there was some other reason, so I was asking what you thought that reason was.
As it turns out, though, you’re saying they changed it for exactly the same reasons I said they were changing it. To let them more easily train AI on that data. So that leaves me wondering what exactly the point of all this was.
I suggest you revisit each response where you asked a question and let me know the count
All data on the internet is crawled and farmed. Weakening regulations doesn’t change this behaviour, just makes it legal
I wrote:
Emphasis added. I only asked questions to clarify what you were saying, since it was unclear.
Which, in turn, makes it easier to do.
If you don’t think it makes it easier then we’re back at square one, you don’t seem to be presenting any reason why this change would be made.
So you admit that you asked questions, specifically why, then told me my answer was your answer
Peak interaction you’ve got there