GeneralRetreat
So conspiracy probably isn’t the right term, although there are common factors that are causing - or at least influencing - a lot of these trends.
With inflation being a major issue, central banks are reacting by increasing interest rates. These rate hikes have the effect of making credit and borrowing more expensive.
This is significant because central rates had been low (nearly 0%) since basically 2008, with quantitative easing (cash printing) pumping billions of additional dollars into the stock markets in particular.
The effect of loaned cash being effectively free is an explosion of activity from investor hedge funds who were willing to take huge risks on speculative projects. This fuelled the massive boom in tech startups across the 00s.
The trouble is, many of those startups weren’t profitable, they were ‘potentially profitable’ and fuelled by credit. Or they had the underpants gnome model of profit where the means and mechanism of the ‘???’ stage would be figured out later (WeWork).
Investors were happy to fund those losses to create products that controlled markets (Uber) or amassed huge userbases that could be flipped from potential to profit in the future (Reddit).
Only now the rates have gone up, and credit is suddenly expensive. Business models that rely on running at a loss suddenly aren’t viable, and those startup investors that owns chunks of those businesses are now insisting on actual returns on their investments.
You can see the effects all over social media and tech, but Reddit (urgently need to get profitable for a stock launch, need the stock launch for funding) and Twitter (basketcase debt load at the worst possible time for debt) are the most obvious examples.
Techbro austerity means worse products for consumers or aggressive monetization policies which users will likely dislike. So not a conspiracy, but decades of reckless investment by hedge funds that have been caught with their pants down by interest risk.
Data Protection shouldn’t be a relevant issue - at least not in the sense that it forcss them to delete accounts. When you process data under the GDPR, you have to identify a lawful basis.
I assume that transactions through the eStore would be handled under the contract basis, with the hosting of the game in the library forming part of the contractual relationship. That would enable them to maintain an account for as long as the contractual relationship persisted.
That basically means GDPR doesn’t force them to close an account, they close an account based on their policies because they choose to. That’ll be based on their T&Cs, so things will fundamentally circle back to whether their T&Cs are legitimate and lawful.
It is possible that a data subject could potentially raise a claim for damages under the GDPR, on the grounds that the deletion of their account is a breach of contract that amounts to an availability data breach.
Canada does good work squashing OPCA claims. I’m very much a fan of Justice Rooke’s utter obliteration of the ideologies’ rhetoric back in 2012.
When the ICO recieve a complaint they usually send an initial notification email to the data controller to advise that a case officer will be assigned in due course.
Well, unless it relates to a serious or ongoing data breach, which tends to be triaged immediately into an active investigation.
Initial notification letters do usually recommend trying to resolve the issue with the data subject in the interim though.
That probably spooked Reddit into moving your case up the priority list as I imagine they’ve got a pretty substantial backlog of SAR, erasure and objection requests, considering the circumstances.
The response window for most of those rights is 30 calendar days + extensions if applicable, so they could also have just been responding as late as allowed, accounting for aforementioned probable backlog.
Do let us know when the ICO gets back to you though, will be fascinating to hear what they have to say.
It looks like the TLD was sold off to a private business by the Internet Assigned Numbers Authority in 1997, with those rights subsequently being sold on to other corporations.
The British government have issued an FOI response advising that they recieve no funds from .io domain registrations. The Chagos Islanders still don’t benefit, but it looks like that’d need to be squared with a hedge fund rather than a government.
…It is weird that territorial domains can be auctioned off in the first place though.
Wait… why doesn’t the USA have a system like this already?
I always found cryptobro preaching about instant cash transfers perplexing, but this explains a lot.
Oof
UK district and borough councils have a homelessness prevention duty which also applies to refugees. Unfortunately said councils are also largely falling to pieces and social housing stock hasn’t met demand since Thatcher eviscerated it in the 80s.
This basically means that a bunch of them are going to end up living long-term in ‘emergency’ B&B placements due to a lack of available social housing, unless they can find private arrangements themselves.
So… was this intended as suicide by border guard? I imagine whatever his original plan is he’s going to end up regretting it.