People's sexual orientation, ethnicity, or political views could be exposed in proposed EU changes to the 'GDPR' digital-rights laws, civil society experts warn, after a leaked draft.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/52834195

https://archive.is/je5sj

“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.

  • FaceDeer@fedia.io
    2·
    1 hour ago

    This is the original commenter justifying why the EU is attempting to loosen their privacy laws.

    Not justifying why, explaining why. I was giving the reason why I think they’re doing this.

    Lots of people hate that it’s being done, so any reasoning behind it is being interpreted as support for it. But I’m not in the EU, I have no skin in this game at all one way or the other, it doesn’t matter to me whether this change is made. I’m just pointing out why I wasn’t surprised this change was made. The GDPR is hindering AI training and AI is a really big thing right now. The AI training stuff wasn’t mentioned in the summary so my mention in the comments is presenting something that other readers might not be aware of.

    The response has frankly been ridiculous. I didn’t include the obligatory “oooh, I hate AI so much!” Flags in my comment, and so this has turned into a huge waste of time as everyone piles on about that rather than about the actual changes to the GDPR the thread was supposedly about.

    • gusgalarnyk@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      57 minutes ago

      I understand you might believe you’re simply explaining why, but based on specifically the sentence I quoted in my last comment it reads like you are explicitly justifying their actions. Again, your intent my have been completely different and I believe you when you say it was. But I would expect people to react to your writing as it was written, not as it was intended.

      I’m sorry you’re getting as much flak as you are. Definitely not warranted based on the top comment alone, but I was only responding to a different commenter to explain my perspective as to why it was happening.

      Again, with evil on the rise having opinions and stances are important. You didn’t intend to relay either of those things, but I at least think you did (and I would water most of your downvoters did too). We’re all learning how to communicate effectively online. Sorry this spiraled out of control. Idk what /u/iii is on about, but I’m at least trying to contribute to the meta conversation about communicating on Lemmy better (not that anyone has to, this is supposed to be a hobby or fun or what have you, no one has to get better at communicating online).