| ▲ | jnovek 4 hours ago | ||||||||||||||||
I don’t care. I don’t care who owns the data. If I can’t easily get private information like my movements removed from a database like this, the legislation does not sufficiently protect me. It should absolutely be Flock’s responsibility to remove my data and we should absolutely require it by law. Full stop. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | rjmunro an hour ago | parent | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
The problem with this is where do you draw the line? If I film you with my iPhone (e.g. you walk past in the background of my video), Apple should delete my video from my phone and iCloud account based only on your instructions? Apple hold the data in iCloud, Apple (or a phone network) may be leasing me the phone. That sounds pretty similar to the Flock situation. I guess the difference is that flock might be sharing the data from a customers camera with other customers. Then they are definitely controlling it. I think the bigger problem with Flock is the fact that their cyber security is so laughably bad that non-customers can easily access the data. | |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | lazide 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | ||||||||||||||||
A reasonably nuanced defense could likely claim that to be able to do what you want, would have much worse side effects on privacy. For example, would you want to be able to tell Public Storage (or some other storage unit place) to remove any naked photos of you stored anywhere in their storage units? For them to actually be able to do that would require they have nigh omniscience on everything stored by/for everyone in every one of their storage units. Even inside closed boxes. Now, it's not the same thing of course - but hopefully you understand what I'm referring to? | |||||||||||||||||
| |||||||||||||||||
| ▲ | tptacek 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | ||||||||||||||||
The law cares about lots of things we don't care about. | |||||||||||||||||