[LegitShady]

> Add "regime change" to the list of things you might have to worry about, even if you "have nothing to hide".

I think you don't need regime change to make something like that critical. Companies aren't institutions, they're organizations staffed by people and they have turnover. A company as it exists today is not the same as that company 5 years which wasn't the same as the company 10 years ago etc.

The decisions a company will make with data you provide them now may well change in the future - when their leadership changes, when the board changes, when the managers change, etc etc.

On top of that, companies are bought and sold. Blizzard was my favorite game developer but after a but of time under activision they don't seem to resemble the blizzard I remember when I enjoyed their products.

And police can get judges to sign subpoenas for data even if the company doesn't want to share it - if you sent dna to 23andme it's definitely something the police can use, for example, with enough justification.

Regime change is probably completely unnecessary to use your data against you, or in ways you never anticipated it being used.

[dredmorbius]

I was hoping that "add to your list" implied that 1) the list had additional items on it and 2) whatever finite set the list contains, it's incommplete.

Yes: the context in which data will exist in the future is not the same as the context in which the data were initially provided or created.

Hell, even the context in which data are accessed or provided virtually always exceeds the data subject's awareness or understanding, and would not be considered acceptable.