...
Rohit Shitre - Working with IronWorks AyanWorks as a blockchain developer. Working on H HL Indy.
Tony Bellan
Minutes
Anti-trust Policy and Code of Conduct
...
Data - such as surveillance - emergent effects led to problems such as subversion of democracy, social credit scoring, and other ways in which unregulated state of affairs led to complete destruction of privacy. Europe started campaign against unregulated data collection - led to regulation written by legislators and lawyers - those with little exposure to true technology. Regulations, meant to be technology neutral, resulted in overreach. Both pendulum extremes led to the current situation. Some of the laws led to data localization - what happens if someone commits a crime and flees to another country? Will the data be available? Priority is to control data - in country. Exceptions include programs such as National Right to Information.
Comment: Tony Bellan. US Citizen - discussion sparked with GDPR. California with CCPA - did something similar to, not quite the same as GDPR. Learning differences between the two scopes - not necessarily models to follow. Since established, seem to be working off of that. Data rights, identity, using GDPR and CCPA as benchmarks.
US on map - no initiatives or information - lack of federal law for privacy. US and AK shown in white. Also have white in China; however, China wants to or has already developed privacy law that no one knows. In China - on the one hand people wanting to protect, on the other hand mass surveillance and social credit scoring.
If developing a global blockchain platform with transnational collaboration - how do you implement cross-jurisdiction protections?
Perhaps as simple as no private information on the blockchain, including private DIFs. What is the scope of the conversation?