"Yeah, hi, I have a gdpr request, all the data you have on me, delete that."
this post was submitted on 14 Oct 2026
188 points (95.2% liked)
Technology
89137 readers
4089 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
We sold it to a third party you'll never find that shares it back to us for free as part of the contract we have with them.
So we don't have any of your data.
So you pay because you have my data without any reasons and because you sold them.
I don't have any data. A third party has your data. But you don't know that.
You said that the third part shared my data with you after you sold them to them, this means that you have my data.
They don't have to tell you shit, and they don't. Only in CA do they even tell you if your information was stolen, unless it's going to come out in the news and they don't want to look like what they are.
Worst case, if they got prosecuted, they'd negotiate a fine and not admit responsibility so no one could use the government's case for a civil suit.
Access to data isn't the same as having data. You can watch a YouTube video but that doesn't mean you downloaded it and have it.
True, but then the data about me you have are useless if you only look at them.
There is no way that you get my data, you sold them to a third part (and here you are already at fault), this third part then share back the data with you for free and then you do nothing with my data, which you asked to begin with. Seriously ?
And I forgot, the third part is at fault too because they have my data without any reasonsand if they get caught they pay a hefty fine.
True, but then the data about me you have are useless if you only look at them.
Marketing data is always kept close by the owners but they sell access or the data would be worthless.
If the original company wants information about you, they don't download everything from a marketing company. Like using Google, you type in your search and get a result. That search result is used and forgotten. You don't have to download all of Google to use the results.
The 3rd party wouldn't be fined because if you knew who they were, you could send them a Gdpr and they would respond. The problem is knowing who these companies are.
Marketing data is always kept close by the owners but they sell access or the data would be worthless.
So your scenario is moot.
The starting point is that company A get my data, then sell them to company B that then share them for free back to company A.
If the original company wants information about you, they don’t download everything from a marketing company. Like using Google, you type in your search and get a result. That search result is used and forgotten. You don’t have to download all of Google to use the results.
If the original company want my informations, it need to ask me the informations (and only the ones needed for the transaction) declaring the use it will do of such informations.
If the original company "googled" my informations, use them to contact my or to try to sell me something, I can ask where they get them and the answer cannot be "we googled them around". That is why the GDPR ask for an explicit consent to share personal informations with third parties.
There are special cases, like a company need to share information with a payment gateway or to retain information for a longer period as dictated by some other laws, but generally a company, without an explicit permission, need ask only the information needed for the transaction and to keep the informations only the time it need to complete the transaction. And even with an explicit permission it can not keep the information for more that a given number of years (3 if I remember correctly) without asking for permission again with the default as "if I don't answer, my answer is no".
The 3rd party wouldn’t be fined because if you knew who they were, you could send them a Gdpr and they would respond.
Your starting point is that I don't know who the third part is and I don't know my data were sold.
But te 3rd party would be fined if they were found with my data without being able to offer my persmission to have them when asked.
The problem is knowing who these companies are.
The GDPR state that any company must list all the 3rd parties it shares data with.
"Yeah, OK, done, (LOL)!"
update users set deleted = 1 where username = jagermo
does anyone truly believe they respect those delete requests?
Not the US-based companies, no. But occasionally they get some interesting fines when breaching GDPR, and that does seem to cause some adherence. I'm just happy to live in EU.
Add "make no mistake" at the back willil increase the chance they follow through your delete request.
Probably more business suit guys talking about stuff they don't understand. They probably imagine "AI" as some unlimited resource that they can command any amount of tasks from, but the scale they are fantasizing about doesn't seem realistic to me
Yeah it's Y Combinator. It's probably from a young and dynamic entrepreneur who has already revolutionized the javascript landscape by introducing and accelerating a completely new and revolutionary package to deal with emojis at scale (and Knuckles). They definitely know about compitars.
Yeah also this:
Outlit’s goal is to amass as much real-time information about a company’s clients as possible. According to Earle, agents trawl internal records like call logs and sales data as well as external information like social media posts and the websites of people’s employers; they then compile that data into detailed customer profiles, often complete with “actionables” like outreach recommendations and sales guidance. Outlit argues this level of insight will help companies prevent “churn” — business jargon for lost customers — or find opportunities to upsell.
Isn’t new or novel in any way. Our sales team at the company I work for has a bespoke version of this. The model pulls in information from previous customer interactions, scours LinkedIn and the web and larger industry trends, and gives them a profile. There’s no benefit to having some long running agent that constantly watches someone’s online activity when you can ingest the log when it’s actionable.
They’re grifters who will grift people with no idea how this stuff works, they’ll get a valuation of x number of millions with some CLAUDE.md files omarchy style, then salesforce will eat them for their valuation and they go on to grift some more
Their goal is to get as close as possible to a working proof of concept, and wait for Meta, Google, or Palantir to buy them.
Could work for surveilling business customers.
"Yes, we call it the 'Agentic System Surveillance Holistic Observation Leveraging Enterprise', or ASSHOLE for short"
A whole agent? If I find a company doing this, I'll use BeautifulSoup on a spare computer to click around their website randomly 24/7. They'll end up with a comically high bill for a few hours of effort on my part. Might even make it a Docker container.
It’s going to be Shopify, to start.
Uh, can you elaborate on this beautifulsoup on a spare computer? High bill for what?
BeautifulSoup is a Python library that allows interacting with webpages inside a program. The high bill would be for having the LLM agent analyze all of the random clicks that I'd be having my Python program make.
Thanks for the reply I will look into this.
Could one be criminally charged for this if one didn't cover their tracks, out of curiosity? Obviously one would want to do this anonymously or not at all just curious.
It's not too different from the web scraping that companies have been doing for 30+ years or the LLM training that happens at an insane scale. It's just intentionally poorly done so that it wastes LLM resources trying to analyze it. Fundamentally, you're just making a program that clicks links a lot. I don't see how you could even be successfully civilly penalized for it, let alone criminally, but I'm also not a lawyer.
At least in the states, the population gave up their expectation of privacy in the name of security and convenience, a long time ago.
You think this will just be for Americans?
Laughs in incoming global police state
They took »know your customer« and somehow arrived at »assign them a tireless digital stalker.« The founder says there’s no need to inform anyone because it’s legal, which is a fascinating way to announce that ethics has been laid off and its job outsourced to the legal department. Peak Silicon Valley: replacing customer relationships with the CIA, the Customer Intelligence Agents.
Never will happen. This is another engineers dream. It’s simply way too costly to burn tokens for every customer.
Yeah, how is this not harassment?
Dystopia. Sold to us as a cute solution to problems we don't have.
These asshats can't make a good product anymore even with all the data in the world.
Look at Netflix trying to game art by including superficialities in their productions to appeal to niche audiences.
That's what the data centers are for. Makes sense. A lot of people times a lot of companies equals insane compute power.
But then they'll notice it costs a shitton of money, and downgrade the LLM to Luna, and then not actually learn anything that Amazon, Meta and Google don't already know anyway.
And it still costs a shitkilo or money.
“The whole surveillance component came up because that’s the way we feel companies can serve their customers,” Earle told Futurism in an interview.
I hate it here. Is that it? Is that really what you think, Earle? Fucking moron. We need to start punishing these CEOs, harass them anytime they are out, make being a little freak piece of shit like this miserable.
And every customer will have own agent to corrupt and obfuscate their every move for watcher. 10 years after someone realize that we are burning a huge amount of computational resources for this totally redundant "agnets-in-middle" and European Commission restricts such a practices.
"Will soon... "?
You're a couple years late to the party, pal.
But now it knows.
AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI AI
It's the latest keyword in the latest corporate drivel!!!! BUZZ!!!!!!!
:sigh:
Of course companies collect data about their customers and try to use it. This is nothing new.
Thanks, I hate it.
target already uses ptz cameras to track would be shoplifters(gait, walking style, body position), naturally this is likely being used to target customers of what thier buying preferences is.
That's... Not how LLM agents work.