|
Lopatir wrote: the other you asks why your data was deleted (cover their own asses)
"Because I have the right to ask for that, under current laws".
They can ask what they want; how you answer is up to you.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Lopatir wrote: - the regulator needs proof that they honored YOUR request.
"We have no record of this person".
How does that not work?
The idea that they have to store a copy of my passport (on what is probably a number of eminently hackable servers) in order to delete my data goes beyond the pale.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
modified 23-Feb-19 11:24am.
|
|
|
|
|
I was sort of joking but it is actually true to some extent.
Tax authorities for instance require organisations to keep full records of financial transactions for a number of years (typically 5 - 11 years) so they actually can not totally expunge all records they have. (Ideally though that would be kept separate / isolated from the day-to-day booking systems.)
But even the authority controlling privacy needs to know that requests made for personal information removal are being honored, just saying "we have no records" would not suffice, as suggested the minimal requirement would be to record the request for data removal with some means of identifying the source of that request was verified and performed. Again it should be held away from the day-to-day operational systems.
Albeit separated, some data must and will be be retained.
Message Signature
(Click to edit ->)
|
|
|
|
|
I don't know what you beef is with Airbnb, but replying to someone who just does their job (whether it's lovely Florencia or big fat slob Miguel doesn't matter) ""clever"" and "slimy" and threatening with "harsher action" at their very first response makes you the a**hole here.
How about:
Hi Florencia,
I'm well, thank you, I hope you're good as well.
You're asking for a photocopy, but I don't see how that's going to help because you don't know what I look like.
I'm emailing you from this email address, which should be proof enough that I am who I am.
Please let me know when my account is deleted.
Best,
Mark That sounds so much nicer while still conveying the message.
If they keep insisting you can reply in a harsher tone and even take "harsher action" (against Airbnb, not Florencia).
Still no reason to call people slimy and "clever" though.
You're complaining about people, but to me it seems you're the problem.
|
|
|
|
|
|
You're unaware of the full history, so your misapprehension can be excused.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
any of the new generation platform facebook and after...you are the product...for them to make money ! ..
Caveat Emptor.
"Progress doesn't come from early risers – progress is made by lazy men looking for easier ways to do things." Lazarus Long
|
|
|
|
|
I can see no honest or lawful way that they can profit by having a copy of my passport.
Plenty of criminal ways, but no honest or lawful ones.
And the way they demanded it proves their ill intent:
0. Take the money
1. Wait until the last moment
2. Tell the customer that you won't fulfill the contract unless he hands over sensitive, personal documents -- during Spring Break, when everything is booked solid!
It's slimy, evil coercion, where 99% of people would have no choice other than to accede to it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
|
+1 for the vid with Vince Clarke in it.
Just had a Yazoo and Depeche Mode weekend a month ago - shouldv'e included Erasure..
|
|
|
|
|
I would've asked 'Florencia' for a photocopy of her(his) passport so you know who you're sending yours to.
|
|
|
|
|
Jörgen Andersson wrote: I would've asked 'Florencia' for a photocopy of her(his) passport so you know who you're sending yours to.
???Mark_Wallace wrote: I can't be @rsed to demand certified copies of his passport
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Gotta fight fire with fire
|
|
|
|
|
Sure, but their demand was a criminal act. If I mimick the demand, I'm trivialising their crime.
Their criminal demand cost me a lot of time and effort (when I didn't have a lot of time or energy), and resulted in my having to pay twice as much, because it's a school holiday, so everywhere's full (and that's not to mention that they still have my money).
When my "buddy from the Ministry" tells me the iron's hot enough for me to initiate a lawsuit, I don't want it thought that I see their crime as being trivial.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: 2.4 User verification on the Internet is difficult and we do not assume any responsibility for the confirmation of any Member’s identity. Notwithstanding the above, for transparency and fraud prevention purposes, and as permitted by applicable laws, we may, but have no obligation to (i) ask Members to provide a form of government identification or other information or undertake additional checks designed to help verify the identities or backgrounds of Members, (ii) screen Members against third party databases or other sources and request reports from service providers, and (iii) where we have sufficient information to identify a Member, obtain reports from public records of criminal convictions or sex offender registrations or an equivalent version of background or registered sex offender checks in your local jurisdiction (if available).
As I read this (from airbnb) their demand of your personal data smells even more fishy... After all, they already removed any responsibility in case you presented fraud data...
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, it is the illusion of knowledge". Stephen Hawking, 1942- 2018
|
|
|
|
|
I know! I read that, and was astounded by the audacity of it!
This non-legal/non-governmental/completely-devoid-of-official-status web-site has gone to a lot of trouble with their wording, to hide the fact that what they're doing is forcing people to hand over their passports, then trawling every database they can find, to collect and connect every scrap of data about their customers that they can.
And, using very typical psychopathic style, they cover their @rses by saying that their customers (whom they held over barrels of screaming kids who would have to miss their trips to funfairs, etc.) have given them permission to do so, by giving in to coercion and handing over their passports.
And people wonder why I don't talk nice to them (after about 50 demands that I hand over my passport, or I'm a "bad person", who "doesn't belong in a community of trust, like airbnb", over the course of a couple of days).
Just because someone smiles at you while he punches your mother in the face and steals her purse doesn't mean you have to smile back and forego kicking him in the nuts.
It's probably like amazon, and has a total psychopath at the top. Psychopathy breeds in organizations, either through hires or "conversions" -- and psychopaths talk more pleasantly than good people, because good people talk honestly; psychopaths are always on the make.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: psychopaths talk more pleasantly than good people, because good people talk honestly; psychopaths are always on the make.
You're going to be very disappointed when you find out that only 1% of people are psychopats. The amount of people that will lie is a bit higher.
Also, honesty is overrated; while it may sound cool to say that it is not the jeans that make her look fat, it is also the most social incompetent way of handling the situation.
It is also not said that psychopats cannot be "good" people, whatever that is.
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: It is also not said that psychopats cannot be "good" people, whatever that is.
Sure, if it's to their profit, and entirely in their own interests.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Sure, if it's to their profit, and entirely in their own interests.
Which also goes for 99% of normal people.
Them religious nuts only try to be nice because they want to enter some heaven. That's not self-interest behind their piety, is it?
How about the average "normal" atheist? Where do they get their moral? Like the psychopats, perhaps from learning (!) what is socially acceptable and what isn't, and behaving accordingly?
Show me ten normal people, and I shall heal them 
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Which also goes for 99% of normal people.
Not at all.
Well over 90% of people will make an effort to treat people decently, and offer assistance to people who have problems, even if they get absolutely nothing out of it -- not even rep, kudos, and/or the keys to Heaven.
By definition, psychopaths will not. They are incapable of it.
I think you might be getting psychopaths mixed up with @rseholes.
@rsehole behaviour is just behaviour, which some people exhibit more than others, but which everyone exhibits, from time to time. Psychopathic behaviour is the result of a mental condition.
Psychopaths are @rseholes all the time -- but some of them manage to hide it behind outward behaviour which makes people think they're not.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Well over 90% of people will make an effort to treat people decently, and offer assistance to people who have problems, even if they get absolutely nothing out of it -- not even rep, kudos, and/or the keys to Heaven.
Because it is in their interest to do so; it makes one a member of society, bringing some benefits. There's also some punishments for not being a "decent" member of society. That's also why you don't steal or murder, even when pressed 
Mark_Wallace wrote: By definition, psychopaths will not. They are incapable of it.
Why would they be incapable of such? Please explain the mystical barrier
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Because it is in their interest to do so
I'm afraid not. The conscious desire to "play nice with the other kids" has nothing to do with conscious self interest; it's evolved instinct (another mental condition, if you wish).
It's all well researched and documented, with so much experimental and empirical proof that there's no arguing with it.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Mark_Wallace wrote: By definition, psychopaths will not. They are incapable of it.
Why would they be incapable of such? Please explain the mystical barrier
Um, because that's the definition of the word -- which is kinda why I said "by definition".
"Pathological narcissism" is my favourite way of expressing it (Otto or Igor someone -- this ain't a formal text, so I'm not bothering to look up attributions)
People who don't meet that definition ain't psychopaths, just like people who ain't got blond hair ain't blond (even if they go to great lengths and expense to fake it).
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Um, because that's the definition of the word -- which is kinda why I said "by definition".
No, it's not. A psychopat will be nice and kind if it is in his or her interest.
Mark_Wallace wrote: "Pathological narcissism" is my favourite way of expressing it
A narcist and a psychopat are two different things.
Mark_Wallace wrote: People who don't meet that definition ain't psychopaths
Then psychopats don't exist
Bastard Programmer from Hell
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
Eddy Vluggen wrote: A psychopat will be nice and kind if it is in his or her interest.
Well, I'm glad we at least agree on that much.
Eddy Vluggen wrote: A narcist and a psychopat are two different things.
It was described as the highest form of narcissism (quite rightly, when you think about it) by an accepted high-order expert on the subject, named [take a breather whilst I search for the name] Otto Kernberg (Damn! I was hoping it was Igor something!)
Eddy Vluggen wrote: Then psychopats don't exist
Oh, they do.
But it can be very hard to tell whether you're talking to a genuinely good person, or a psychopath who's playing you.
I remember, going back a few years, there was a trial of a group-therapy thing, aimed at helping psychopaths to stop being psychopathic criminals, by, among other things, making them take part in role-play exercises where they (in theory) would learn to be a tad more selfless.
It was abandoned after two or three years (or maybe not even that long), because all it achieved was to teach them how to better pretend to be selfless.
Gun. Bang. Ow, my foot!
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Mark_Wallace wrote: Well, I'm glad we at least agree on that much.
You didn't; according to you that was impossible, due to the definition.
Mark_Wallace wrote: It was described as the highest form of narcissism (quite rightly, when you think about it) by an accepted high-order expert on the subject, named [take a breather whilst I search for the name] Otto Kernberg (Damn! I was hoping it was Igor something!)
Meaning it is arrogant, not that a psychopath acts like a narcist.
Mark_Wallace wrote: But it can be very hard to tell whether you're talking to a genuinely good person, or a psychopath who's playing you.
Now you are claiming a psychopath cannot be a good person; while in the first paragraph of the post you agree that one would have good reason to.
Mark_Wallace wrote: aimed at helping psychopaths to stop being psychopathic criminals
Yes, because mental tendencies as categorized by DSM IV means the subject IS a criminal, regardless of past or actions taken 
Mark_Wallace wrote: all it achieved was to teach them how to better pretend to be selfless.
Which is what "normal" humans do. It is also simply good economics to ask the Garfield-question (what's in it for me?). You might say that evolution did not kill the psychopath because it has an evolutionary advantage.
Bastard Programmer from Hell 
If you can't read my code, try converting it here[^]
"If you just follow the bacon Eddy, wherever it leads you, then you won't have to think about politics." -- Some Bell.
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
