• Fjdybank@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 hours ago

    I get it, but I believe it to be a false equivalence. This change is not happening in isolation. There is currently a general trend towards de-anonymising users, and this DOB field is a step in that direction.

    The only real question is, do I want my computer storing more, or less, personally identifying information. Given that I don’t trust the intended use, or ANY use which is later enabled by this, my answer is ‘less’.

    • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      8 hours ago

      So, how about we start freaking out when someone starts making these fields required, instead of right away?

      • WraithGear@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        edit-2
        5 hours ago

        because it’s too late at that point, which is the whole point and issue!

        if the field is necessary, but the data is useless, then it shouldn’t be there. if the data becomes required then it should not be there. so the result, it should not be there

        • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          3 hours ago

          because it’s too late at that point, which is the whole point and issue!

          A PR is when the discussion is supposed to happen. It’s an open source project, nothing happens “too late” to discuss. You see that change in the pull request, you can start moaning about it.

          if the field is necessary, but the data is useless, then it shouldn’t be there

          Who defines what’s “useless”? You? On what authority?

          • WraithGear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 hours ago

            the discussion happens right now, because i said so, because others are talking about it. and the data is useless when anything can be put in, it’s not used for anything, and it can’t be verified. it fails all three tests in determining usefulness

            • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              3 hours ago

              Why hasn’t the discussion started when realName was introduced?

              Someone may find these data points useful, for whatever reason. No point in being angry at a date field, mate.

                • Alaknár@sopuli.xyz
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  3 hours ago

                  Again: what authority do you have to decide which data fields are useful, and which aren’t?

                  How do you personally differentiate between “useful” and “useless”? Is it: “I have no need for it therefore it needs to be removed”, by any chance?

                  • WraithGear@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    3 hours ago

                    by your claim, the field can have any series of numbers, that there is no way to determine if it is accurate, and the law that this was done to appease is bad, as in not able to obtain its expected result. and so the data is useless.

                    if some api/program/government wishes to get my information, they can ask me so that i may decline. there is no use case that these fields are a benefit to the user. and as such must be wrenched out with the fervor reserved for denying a fey creature your name.

                    if the argument is that these entities can get my name by other means anyway, then this data is redundant and useless.