[laszlojamf]

I agree that DPA:s, as they are written today, aren't good. I was just pointing out that the reality probably isn't as bad as the article made it sound.

> If you don't see this as a problem, you are a part of the problem

I think you're misunderstanding me. I'm just saying that there are way bigger fish to fry in terms of privacy on the internet than passport data. In the end, your face is on every store's CCTV camera, your every friends phone, and every school yearbook since you were a kid. Unless you ask all of them to also delete it once they are done with it.

[fainpul]

But it makes a big difference if some CCTV camera captures my face and comes up with "unknown person" or if it finds my associated passport and other information.

By the way, ever since facebook was a thing I always asked my friends not to tag me in any photos and took similar measures at every opportunity to keep my data somewhat private.

[troupo]

> I agree that DPA:s, as they are written today, aren't good.

That is, multiple regulations already explicitly restrict the amount of data you can collect and pass on to third parties.

And yet you're here saying "it's not that bad, we don't send eggregious amounts of data to all 17 data brokers at once, inly to 2 or 3 at a time, no big deal"

> In the end, your face is on every store's CCTV camera, your every friends phone

If you don't see how this is a problem already, and is now exacerbated by huge databases cross-referencing your entire life, you are a part of the problem