Hacker News Reader

Comment by fsflover | Hacker News Reader

This is exactly what GDPR does.

Does it apply to the government like it applies to people? Is it enforced against governments like it is enforced against people and corporations? A core issue here is that laws, and the application and enforcement of laws, generally do not. Having said that I applaud the attempt and encourage pushing forward on the anti-surveillance aspects of GDPR while recognizing all laws are flawed.

State actors are inherently only subject to their own oversight

The telco would be the one collecting it first, I assume. It would be interesting for someone in the EU to request their data from their telco, and if it contains these precise locations, question the usage.

Tescos in the EU are required to track location for emergency call purposes and provide it to the government in such occasions. That means they need the ability to collect it all the time.

The parent comment specifically mentioned the _collected_ data, not the ability/authorisation to collect it.

They're raising the possibility of asking _why_ the data was collected if there was no emergency?

Of course if the telco doesn't store the rewuests/responses, there will be no records to show.

It needs to be collected to serve the devices properly. Today's RF is very targeted with multi stream etc.

Yeah it applies to government like local municipalities have to adhere to GDPR, they cannot just have your name on the register, they have to have a legal reason.

Way you could argue it doesn’t apply to government is that the government makes the law so they can make the law that makes data processing and having your name on some kind of registry required.

But still they have to show you the reason and you can escalate to EU bodies to fine your own country if they don’t follow the rules.

I guess. In Poland when I go to gov offices I need to sign 25 GDPR clauses

Reply on news.ycombinator.com