[vineyardmike]

> Even something as simple as SSN + DOB runs into loads of potential formatting and data entry issues you'll have to perfectly solve

You don’t have to solve it perfectly to be an improvement.

Also this is BS. Not every bit of data is perfectly formatted and structured but both of your examples are structured data. You can 100% reliably and deterministically hash this data.

There’s so much in your argument that can be replied with “imperfect is better than status quo”. If you give someone the wrong DOB, it’s “not you” anyways, at least let me scrub my real data even if the entry is imperfect for some people or some records.

[JohnMakin]

> You don’t have to solve it perfectly to be an improvement.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nirvana_fallacy

[kube-system]

> You don’t have to solve it perfectly to be an improvement.

They don't want to solve your problem. You aren't their customer. They want to comply with the letter of the request in as much as it covers their own butt in terms of regulatory requirements and/or political optics.

[vineyardmike]

The “solution” mentioned is political. A requirement that data on an individual is properly deleted when presented with the data would be “good”. A requirement that captures every nuance of mistakes would be “perfect”.

Hashing a birthday and SSN is deterministic. We could deterministically keep that data deleted. This would be better than we have today, and could be done reliably and affordably.

The companies can easily be required (by law) to implement the “good” solution. Everyone complaining it’s not “perfect” is stopping “good”.

[lanstin]

People switch digits in their SSN.

[vineyardmike]

Then it’s different… Better vs perfect.

If you can’t get your SSN right, you can’t expect a company to delete it.