My initial reaction is to assume that they were rejected because of a lack of experience, which is unfortunate but understandable. They may have mentally attributed it to only their age, but it's very easy to assume your own suspicions after getting a reason-free boilerplate rejection.
That being said, I would love to see the rejection letter.
If that's your angle, remember that that nonsense included explicitly the suggestion that one problem with tracking might be when you "get involved with a terror group", along with other drivel about "digitized karma" and unwanted ads. If you don't want ads, run an adblocker. That's literally what they're for.
I work at Microsoft Research in the UK. A few weeks ago we had a lecture from a lawyer on exactly this subject. Her main point was that GDPR gives people the right to request their data be deleted but it gives companies the right to refuse if it would cause unreasonable damage to their business. Until a case makes its way through all levels of the court system, nobody knows how this collision of rights will be interpreted.
I suspect someone would have to show that the model trained on their data revealed something about them in a practically harmful way.
> A few weeks ago we had a lecture from a lawyer on exactly this subject. Her main point was that GDPR gives people the right to request their data be deleted but it gives companies the right to refuse if it would cause unreasonable damage to their business.
I guess it still needs to be litigated, but the question on my mind is: Does that right of refusal only apply to the model, or also the data that trained it. If it applies to the data, the regulation is pretty useless, since anyone could avoid the deletion requirements by training models on it, if it doesn't I think the use in the model takes care of itself. At some point they'll need to retrain, and then you're data won't be there.
I feel though that the point of the GDPR was to protect our personal data held by companoes, not to prevent companies using our personal data to make money.
So if a company uses your personal data to train a model (lets assume you willingly gave your informed consent for the time being), and then they delete your data after they have trained their model, does that model contain your personally identifiable inbformation? I'd argue that it does not - the model is just some weights, right? So 0.6 34.291, 0.0016 - is that you, mum?
.... but having just said that, I do wonder what happens if you run the model in reverse, like the deepdream stuff did (1). Could it re-generate PII (or rather generate "nearly-PII") purely from those weights?
Can you prove it is? Many many things can be personally identifiable given enough resources and associated data, so it's unclear whose burden of proof it is, especially considering sibling comment mentioning a GDPR exception to delete data if it causes sizable damage to a business.
As with everything else Brexit related, technically the UK won’t be bound but practically it will have to choose between following one of the three major economic blocks — EU, USA, China — or struggling economically because they refuse to believe the Commonwealth is not on that list.
Yep, I think the current understanding is that all EU laws will still apply - they kind of grandfather them in - with the understanding that they could repeal them at a later date (as they can for any law).
AIUI, the GDPR by itself doesn't apply to the UK (or any other EU member state in particular). Instead, the GDPR forces member states to enact laws that implement those rules.
This means that, after Brexit, the GDPR implementation laws will still be law in the UK. Depending on the outcome of the Brexit negotiations, the UK might or might not be in a position to repeal those laws at their own discretion.
the key word is General Data Protection Regulation. Regulations are law, and apply directly, no local implementation needed (except for "interfaces", e.g. in the case of GDPR changes to existing laws to clarify how they interact with GDPR and to make exceptions GDPR explicitly allows the states to make)
Directives are the ones that only direct the states to enact laws implementing them.
Is it? EU laws are written into our own national laws, and so to assume UK citizens won't be subject to GDPR (or requirements akin to it) is perhaps not sound.
It will happen automatically, by law in march. That is what article 50 does.
The battle now is, what form does the divorce take, messy and sharp (no deal, where the UK has no access to anything without lots of barriers) or really painful, where we loose access to lots of things, but retain access to a few key things.
There is a very remote chance, very remote, that a referendum will take place, but unless article 50 is rescinded it will be meaningless, as we will leave the EU automatically at the end of march.
It will have to happen - the vocal leavers would create an absolute shitstorm if the government even considered reneging on article 50. Even if we weren't in a situation where the leadership of both relevant parties is committed to Brexit it'd be political suicide.
As of today it's looking more and more likely that the separation will be in name more than in function though.
> As of today it's looking more and more likely that the separation will be in name more than in function though.
its worse than that. Its what nobody wants: tied to some parts of the EU, with no say whatso ever. In the case of the finance industry, it'll be 60 days notice to comply or access is withdrawn. Brilliant for the EU as it means that it can start creaming off the finance industry and the vast sums of money it generates in tax.
+1 hour commutes on the tube, rude people, diesel fumes, outrageous rental prices. I could go on but I'm at work. This country cares WAY too much about London.
I disagree that this is good. Volatile tax rates and regulations make businesses less likely to invest and innovate. They will spend more of their time hiring lawyers and accountants, spending less time producing valuable goods and services.
Really? I wonder what the culture is like at Valve