It's been a problem for a while. Considering major social media companies have already gotten massive fines from the EU for violating the GDPR, maybe the lemmy devs will put more effort in setting up a deletion system once the EU sends them a fine for breaking the law?

[–] FaceDeer@kbin.social 3 points 11 months ago (3 children)

The EU doesn't have global jurisdiction, if an instance developer or admin has no EU presence then they could just ignore them.

[–] jman6495@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Sure, but EU data protection laws may require EU based Lemmy instances to block instances that dont honour deletion requests.

This is why mastodon was built GDPR compliant by design.

load more comments (2 replies)

load more comments (5 replies)

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

That's a pretty uncharitable interpretation, especially considering Lemmy is developed in and funded in part by the EU, and the "staying online forever" thing is a consequence of Federation (and one they're working on remedying).

If you were worried about this sort of thing, perhaps you should have done your research about the platform before making an account so you could bitch about it here. You definitely don't sound like the voice of reason when you couldn't be arsed to figure this out before you made an account.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

So you can't make an account on this platform if you don't agree with how it operates? By that logic no criticism of the platform by its users is possible, which is a great way to ensure it never gets better.

Edit: Let me make this clearer:

Saying in effect "yet you participate in lemmy" to dismiss the OP's concerns is ridiculous. If this logic were taken to its endpoint, there would be no valid criticism of anything lemmy ever did.

Maybe that's your goal, but I would rather not blindly defend lemmy because I like it. I'd rather make it better, and that starts with criticism.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 4 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I mean, yes?

If you do not agree to the terms of a service, do not use the service. This is the case for essentially every system ever. You can go complain about it on Reddit or something if you like.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 2 points 11 months ago (9 children)

Okay, since you clearly carefully read and completely agree and support eveything in the Lemmy TOS, please tell me where it says it will keep your comments forever.

[–] BraveSirZaphod@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago

I'm not saying that the terms can't be more transparent, because they absolutely can be.

But if you have become aware of this practice and you continue to participate, you have de facto agreed to it. You can of course agree to the terms and continue to criticize them, but you don't get to sign up for a soccer game and then claim that the rules against using your hands don't actually apply to you. If you don't want to face the consequences of how distributed services like this fundamentally work, don't use them.

load more comments (8 replies)

[–] SnotFlickerman@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (3 children)

It took this person 20 days to post this. They didn't create their account to post it the same day or even the next day, ergo, they figured it out after the fact.

If they really had an issue with stuff like this, why pray-tel weren't they already doing their due diligence to ensure that the service they were signing up for didn't violate the GDPR in ways they didn't like? That seems like a gross oversight by someone clearly incensed by it.

(Also, it continues to be questionable whether it's actually breaking GDPR rules, and even in that regard, it would be individual server admins responsible for enforcing GDPR compliance.)

load more comments (3 replies)

[–] magnetosphere@kbin.social 2 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (1 children)

I don’t agree with that reasoning. It’s entirely possible for someone to be personally accepting of the Fediverse’s privacy issues, but make an intelligent, well informed, coherent critique of them.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 1 points 11 months ago (1 children)

Like perhaps the OP did? Seems like they had to personally accept the TOS, or at least tolerate it, but they also have a critique.

I also still don't see how "yet you participate in lemmy" is a real answer.

load more comments (1 replies)

load more comments