an Uber spokesperson said, "We strongly disagree with this decision and disproportionate fine, which we will appeal. The AP examined historic policies that were discontinued years ago. …
So, basically, “we broke the law 4 years ago. That’s like forever ago, so you can’t fine us.”
If that’s their legal defense, LMFAO.
Imagine living somewhere that brings suits against companies for hurting workers, without the workers themselves needing to pay exorbitant fees to bring a class action.
deleted by creator
Data protection is actually a misnomer. Protecting your data is just a tool to protect you.
And so the GDPR does not only protect your data. It also protects you from things like profiling or automated legal decisions based on existing data.
For example a health provider is of course allowed to collect and save you health information. Analysing their huge data set and deciding that you are statistically a risk patient and terminating your contract is still very much illegal.
But doesn’t protect you against ChatControl.
It very much does. Else there would be no need for the EU to create legislation allowing/mandating it.
Right now member states are not allowed to unilaterally mandate chat control I believe.
No it doesn’t unfortunately, chat control is literally a loophole for big tech to gather data. They call it a “derogation”.
@AcesFullOfKings @sanitation Article 22
The data subject shall have the right not to be subject to a decision based solely on automated processing, including profiling, which produces legal effects concerning him or her or similarly significantly affects him or her.
Does that mean “the car”?, because I read this as “Tesla knocks out some drivers.”
Nah, you can’t fire people via AI. Or if you want to be pedantic, you can’t make automated decisions about people via AI.
