I would love to see a rider from the courts mandating a significant third party test by privacy researchers to see if the deidentified data can be reconstructed from models post training.

▲

geoduck14 a day ago | parent [-]

The article mentions: a 3rd party company will scrub the data amd Google will promise not to attempt to reconstruct PII from the data.

That is good enough for me. If they violate their promise to the judge, the court can lay the hammer down on them

▲

m4rtink a day ago | parent | next [-]

Good, they never break promises, so it should be fine. It also implies you can reconstruct personal information from the data. Perfect.

▲

DauntingPear7 a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Maybe we can all be blessed with 2 quarters from a multi-year class action in a decade

	▲	lazide a day ago \| parent [-]
		Don't forget the eventual settlement for $10 worth of coupons for purchases at the company.

▲

notabotiswear a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Yes, but did they _pinky promise?_

▲

squigz a day ago | parent | prev | next [-]

How is the court going to ensure they stick to that promise? Or is this basically just a pinky promise?

▲

gessha a day ago | parent | prev [-]

Here, you dropped this: /s

	▲	Cider9986 a day ago \| parent [-]
		I love the /s