← Back to context

Comment by jordanb

1 day ago

"De-identified" data is trivially easy to re-identify, especially by google.

https://www.nytimes.com/2006/08/09/technology/a-face-is-expo...

8 comments

jordanb

Reply
PowerElectronix  1 day ago

Specially when you have a list of flights, people on board, issues, etc... The fact that they are specifically tellling people to not worry about that is also a red flag for me. They know what they'd worry about if they were the affected ones.

limagnolia  1 day ago

Sure, you can argue that its a bad deal, shouldn't be allowed period, etc. But that is a different argument than saying that there is no scrutiny.

  • xp84  1 day ago

    Sounds like a case of “there’s not enough scrutiny unless the decision ends up agreeing with my position”

  • girvo  1 day ago

    The argument is that the scrutiny is in practice not sufficient, as usual in these cases.

    • vkou  1 day ago

      The argument generally doesn't demonstrate that. The argument generally goes:

      1. Google could do it.

      2. <This space is intentionally left blank>

      3. Therefore, Google is doing it!

      (Step 2 needs to be filled in a bit for it to be a good argument. Generally, analogies don't quite make the cut.)

      2 replies →