What do they know?
他們掌握了什么览露？
Antonio García Martínez, a former Facebook product manager, says that sending Mr Dehaye his Pixel data would be technically difficult. Facebook’s global corporate structure makes it even harder. Employees of Facebook Ireland, he says, have “no power or leverage to tell an engineer at Menlo Park” to do anything, including retrieving Mr Dehaye’s data.
前臉書產(chǎn)品經(jīng)理 Antonio García Martínez 表示醋寝，從技術(shù)上而言把 Pixel 軟件收集的關(guān)于 Dehaye 先生的數(shù)據(jù)提供給他本人將是困難的口糕。臉書的全球化運營更是增添了這一復雜度板祝。他表示，愛爾蘭的臉書員工“無權(quán)也無力指示門洛帕克市的臉書工程師“該怎么做走净，比如取得 Dehaye 先生的個人數(shù)據(jù)券时。
Other Europeans run into similar quagmires with American tech companies. Millie Graham Wood, a solicitor with Privacy International, a charity, has tried for six months to find out what data Google has collected from her Nest smart thermostat. The firm has sent her only links to privacy policies, blog posts and irrelevant log data, each time after a long delay. “It’s been a real nightmare,” says Ms Wood. “If you’re not a lawyer, you’re going to give up.” She has appealed to Britain’s data-protection regulator.
其他歐洲人在處理和美國科技公司的相關(guān)問題時也陷入了類似的困境孤里。服務于一家名為隱私國際的慈善組織的事務律師 Millie Graham Wood 花了六個月的時間去搞清谷歌公司通過她的巢式智能恒溫器收集了那些數(shù)據(jù)。谷歌公司只是將隱私政策的鏈接橘洞、博客文章和無關(guān)的數(shù)據(jù)記錄發(fā)送給她捌袜，并且每次都是在拖延很久之后。Wood 女士表示“這就是一個噩夢炸枣，如果你不是一個律師虏等，可能一定會放棄的”。她已經(jīng)向英國數(shù)據(jù)保護管理機構(gòu)上訴适肠。
The tech companies prefer to meet their obligations through web portals which let people download some, but not necessarily all, of their data. That may not be enough, especially if the portal includes data that users have uploaded themselves, but not the way the system categorises them. The GDPR makes few changes to subject-access rights, other than removing a small fee which data controllers had been able to charge. This is likely to lead to more requests. Refusal to provide the requested data has never been tested in court. As Europeans fret ever more about what data moguls know about them, that is likely to change.
科技公司傾向于通過網(wǎng)絡入口的方式來履行這些義務霍衫，比如讓用戶下載關(guān)于他們自己的部分，但并不是全部數(shù)據(jù)侯养。這樣的做法可能并不足夠敦跌，特別是當這些數(shù)據(jù)包括了用戶自己上傳的那部分，卻并沒有關(guān)于公司是如何分類使用這些數(shù)據(jù)的內(nèi)容逛揩。GDPR 在針對獲取數(shù)據(jù)的權(quán)利上面做出了一點改變柠傍，而不是僅僅對那些數(shù)據(jù)保有公司進行減稅，而這些稅公司完全負擔得起辩稽。這會導致更多針對獲取自身數(shù)據(jù)的請求惧笛。拒絕提供這些數(shù)據(jù)會在法庭上帶來怎樣的后果尚不明確。當歐洲公民越來越擔憂數(shù)據(jù)大亨通過數(shù)據(jù)來認識他們時逞泄，局面將會發(fā)生改變患整。
