[pdkl95]

> they don't seem to be able to use it well

You are implicitly assuming that this won't change. Databases persist indefinitely.

> The information is only valid for hours or days.

This simply isn't true. You seem to be only thinking about single data points, not the entire picture about your life that is painted when you aggregate that all of the captured data. For example, timestamps of your clicks build a pattern about when you use your computer, and the domain names you have visited (including the order you visited them) probably gives a reasonably accurate estimation of your political views, personal beliefs, and other data that you haven't shared on the web. (Bayesian analysis, machine learning, and other modern analysis methods do amazing things with minimal data)

> I guess

It might be a good idea to not base your risk analysis on a guess. If you have no other option and have guess the level of risk, you should be assume the worse. Assuming benevolence (or incompetence) without evidence is incredibly foolish.

[enraged_camel]

>>Databases persist indefinitely.

They can, but most don't, simply because it's not worth the effort and expense.

[falcolas]

From personal experience as a DBA: the effort usually consists of not deleting rows out of the database. The expense is a few cents a month for gigabytes of data.

Worst case scenario, the companies will simply set up a separate data warehouse style data store, and make it available to anyone who wants it internally. If we as consumers are lucky, they will scrub the data of PII before moving it to the data warehouse.

[tunap]

Worst case scenario must include if they find a market for the data, similarl to the recent AT&T revelations.

Pick your source:

https://encrypted.google.com/search?q=at%26t+data+government...

[dx034]

They will probably put it in some archive where they delete it after 10 years. Or they keep it somewhere on a drive where it could be accessed but will never be, since no one has a reason to use the data.