February 24, 2010 at 4:31 pm
Steve Jones - Editor (2/24/2010)
I hope that Google isn't implying they are removing data and then keeping it. My guess is they remove the references from my account, but they keep some type of anonymous, gross metrics on what is searched for no matter what.I'm sure if Google is flagging this and not removing it someone will sue them about it.
I just went through a project with this type of requirement. A state government has requirements to remove all references to a person when a court rules in the person's favor. However, the data tied to the person can't be deleted because it makes it seem like the work never happened, and they don't want their performance measures to not reflect real life.
The solution we implemented was to remove all identifying information regarding the person so there is no way to track who they are, even from historical and archived data. However, the data that was not considered identifying remained in the data warehouse so metrics and reports would be accurate when measuring the actual work performed.
LinkedIn - http://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosbossy
Blog - http://www.carlosbossy.com
Follow me - @carlosbossy
February 24, 2010 at 11:08 pm
Thanks Steve. Now i need to check out the app and start removing data 😉
Jason...AKA CirqueDeSQLeil
_______________________________________________
I have given a name to my pain...MCM SQL Server, MVP
SQL RNNR
Posting Performance Based Questions - Gail Shaw[/url]
Learn Extended Events
February 24, 2010 at 11:54 pm
Steve, this has actually made me thinking of what companies do with that data. I buy clothes at one clothing shop on account and tommorrow 10 other companies have my details and they are phoning or emailing me with some fantastic products. So, what do they do with my data?:crazy:
:-PManie Verster
Developer
Johannesburg
South Africa
I can do all things through Christ who strengthens me. - Holy Bible
I am a man of fixed and unbending principles, the first of which is to be flexible at all times. - Everett Mckinley Dirkson (Well, I am trying. - Manie Verster)
February 25, 2010 at 6:07 am
Manie, this is a common practice to sell customer lists amongst companies (although I don't like that). Younger I've worked with a marketing firm and find out that customers lists were sold based on a multiple of factors including those who satisfied some criterias were sold at an higher price all that without the assent of those whose name were sold.
So in the end you got several call, mail or e-mail from companies you don't know anything about and got flood with, to my view, spam (don't request all that).
February 25, 2010 at 6:59 am
There is a lot of money to be made selling information about people. Years ago I worked in a startup and we would regularly get lists of people to email/call and try to sell products. It always bothered me, and so when we started this site, we refused to buy or sell information.
And we had some nice (five figure) offers for a list of emails.
February 25, 2010 at 7:06 am
I agree Steve.
Another way to build a list around something is offering a sweepstakes with the grand prize as the main point around what you need the customers list.
You will pay for the item or service but in return you will get a good list of people who are interested in that item or service or at least did bother to understand what it is.
It's a common practice.
Not much things are free in this world.
February 25, 2010 at 7:11 am
To see history, I think you need a Google account that you are signed into when you search. I typically remain signed in with Google on my machines
February 25, 2010 at 7:20 am
Megistal (2/25/2010)
I agree Steve.Another way to build a list around something is offering a sweepstakes with the grand prize as the main point around what you need the customers list.
....
One reason why I NEVER enter those contests. Chances of winning are very very small, chances of getting on lists are 100%
On a related note, I am frequently encounter email ads (eWeek and others) about various 'free' white papers on tech subjects, some of which indeed might be interesting. Unfortunately when you go to look at it, you are first hit for company and contact info (so they can bother you with a salesman later). I don't accept those articles. WISE UP VENDORS. If you want more potential customers to look at your offerings, you've got to provide a way for people to see them without getting on some list.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
February 25, 2010 at 8:05 am
Those white papers cost money. The payback is salesman contacting people and making some sales. It's the same thing for contests. They pay for the prices when making a few sales out of hundreds of people (or thousands) entering.
I agree there are better ways to get things done, though I'm not sure we'd have as much content out there without the advertising aspects of the world. No free lunch, and that includes free content.
February 25, 2010 at 8:20 am
Steve Jones - Editor (2/25/2010)
Those white papers cost money. The payback is salesman contacting people and making some sales. It's the same thing for contests. They pay for the prices when making a few sales out of hundreds of people (or thousands) entering.I agree there are better ways to get things done, though I'm not sure we'd have as much content out there without the advertising aspects of the world. No free lunch, and that includes free content.
Hey, it's advertising, and advertising costs money (think about Super Bowl). Same deal. But that's the point: if you really want to get your message to me, early on in the process, while I'm still learning the options, you've got a MUCH better chance if you let me read your case anonymously.
There's something wrong with having to 'pay' to read advertising.
...
-- FORTRAN manual for Xerox Computers --
February 25, 2010 at 2:39 pm
Isn't it all advertising in one way or another?
I've seen numbers like $60 per qualified contact paid by large companies outsourcing the list gathering task. They're willing to pay me $60 bucks for your name/title/email/phone and all it costs you to get the "free" whitepaper is to give me your contact information. In a world of passive surveillance and social networking, it seems like a reasonable deal. Casinos regularly comp lots of nice things but they still make money. Casino patrons gamble, Casinos do business.
It is more obvious now. Database contents have persistence and availability. These tools make it easier to exploit information that has always been done. Consider: You are in the background of a picture of the original Woodstock. From this your potential employer 'infers' many things. You attempt to run for political office, your opposition also "infers" many things from that photo. Your presence at the event was the only opt-in required and you gave permission implicitly. It can't be undone. I feel that digital preservation of life's choices is the "permanent record" you heard about in elementary school. All we can hope to do now is secure access to it in order to protect ourselves from others using that information without our knowledge of it.
Unfortunately, it will have to get worse before it gets better. Currently there is no way for me to accurately prove that I should be able to access your data store for "my" information because there is no key that I can provide that you are allowed to have. The SSN as a cross-discipline identifier is no longer legal to use in many systems. Anything less official is probably too weak to be useful (and trustable).
February 25, 2010 at 2:48 pm
One thing that I have not seen anybody else mention. Is that when a company gets your information from other sources besides you, what will stop them from going back to the same place if you delete the information. It will just show back up in their records and you will have to delete it again and again and . . .
February 26, 2010 at 12:58 am
As a sidebar, I think it should be against the law to associate searches with the humans that made them.
--Jeff Moden
Change is inevitable... Change for the better is not.
February 26, 2010 at 6:33 am
http://blogoscoped.com/archive/2007-09-17-n72.html for further derivation of Jeff's point (courtesy of Cory Doctorow).
---------------------------------------------------------
How best to post your question[/url]
How to post performance problems[/url]
Tally Table:What it is and how it replaces a loop[/url]
"stewsterl 80804 (10/16/2009)I guess when you stop and try to understand the solution provided you not only learn, but save yourself some headaches when you need to make any slight changes."
March 1, 2010 at 3:02 am
I think a data subject should have the right to see all data held about them. For free. This includes all police, security and medical data, all commercial data, all of everything else you can think of.
The data subject should have rights to remove and correct data in most situations, and to add an annotation giving the data subject's views wherever the original data is legally required to be retained (the devil is in the detail about what original data should be protected).
The data subject should have the right to sign individual data items to certify they are correct, and businesses should be obliged to treat non-certified data items as potentially incorrect.
To me, this is just a two-way bargain - you want to collect data about me, therefore I have the right to inspect it, correct errors and remove irrelevant information.
Original author: https://github.com/SQL-FineBuild/Common/wiki/ 1-click install and best practice configuration of SQL Server 2019, 2017 2016, 2014, 2012, 2008 R2, 2008 and 2005.
When I give food to the poor they call me a saint. When I ask why they are poor they call me a communist - Archbishop Hélder Câmara
Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 33 total)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic. Login to reply