Now that is something I agree with (the principle not the particular law).
If we're opening it up to our own opinions - I believe I should have total control over all of the content I generate in all contexts. That would include removing the content I provably generated from any platform at any time. Note that HN doesn't even allow me to do that ... I can't delete posts after some time frame.
But my understanding of GDPR is it doesn't go that far. It applies to PII (Personally Identifying Information). That would include things like mailing address, email addresses, full names, phone number, government ids, etc. I may be wrong, but I do not believe it would apply to the content of shitposts on Reddit.
Where I disagree with the articles vehement moral stance ... is my right to the publicly generated content of other people.
Also, if we want to get all technical, and I'm surprised no one has, there is some analogy to be made between the philosophy of free access to information provided by public libraries and this debate ...
If we're opening it up to our own opinions - I believe I should have total control over all of the content I generate in all contexts. That would include removing the content I provably generated from any platform at any time. Note that HN doesn't even allow me to do that ... I can't delete posts after some time frame.
But my understanding of GDPR is it doesn't go that far. It applies to PII (Personally Identifying Information). That would include things like mailing address, email addresses, full names, phone number, government ids, etc. I may be wrong, but I do not believe it would apply to the content of shitposts on Reddit.
Where I disagree with the articles vehement moral stance ... is my right to the publicly generated content of other people.
Also, if we want to get all technical, and I'm surprised no one has, there is some analogy to be made between the philosophy of free access to information provided by public libraries and this debate ...