Comment on Lemmy's Image Problem
onlinepersona@programming.dev 8 months agoBeautiful example of a commercial company selling products to customers 👍 My questions to you:
- are the lemmy devs a commercial entity who paying clients are dependent on for making a closed source solution that nobody can modify?
- who is non-compliant for failing to remove personal data form the database and filesystem? the admins who have access to the database and filesystem or the lemmy devs who don’t?
- if the people complaining are so concerned, why do they not contribute the code to fix their perceived issues?
Maalus@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Are lemmy admins handling EU information? Yes. Do they offer services? Yes. It doesn’t matter if free or not. Hosting a lemmy instance that allows EU users is therefore illegal.
onlinepersona@programming.dev 8 months ago
Ah, I see. You’re answering your own questions with the answers you like. Do you even need me to agree with yourself?
Let me guess: “no”.
If you want to read your opinion typed by somebody else, I suggest you get a secretary. I’m not here to indulge in your fantasy.
CC BY-NC-SA 4.0
QuaternionsRock@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Of course the Lemmy devs aren’t liable for GDPR violations; the admins are. That doesn’t eliminate the problem, though: if the Lemmy devs wish to see their software used as it is now in the long term, they need to introduce GDPR compliance tools. We should consider it gravely concerning that bad actors (e.g., a Reddit employee) can set up Lemmy admins for a massive GDPR suit at any moment.
Maalus@lemmy.world 8 months ago
Ah, so now that it is really plainly explained and you have no arguments (since you never did) you start complaining and poisoning the discussion. Good job.