• corsicanguppy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    4 hours ago

    … a FOREIGN party. That’s data sovereignty and unchecked spreading of P-I.

    We don’t sue much for that - thats for Americans - but it should be a career-limiting decision.

    • mercano@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      3 hours ago

      The article calls it an internal tool, meaning it’s probably sanctioned by leadership. I don’t know, everything after the first paragraph is behind a paywall.

      • CompactFlax@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 hours ago

        Approval by leadership of a tool is not necessarily reflective of the governance requirements of the organization. Data classification exists but in VERY few orgs is it respected and followed.

        “You can use ChatGPT to write Facebook posts” is sanctioning by leadership.

        “You can use ChatGPT” is what people often hear.

        15 years ago it was “my manager got us Dropbox”.

    • saltesc@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      edit-2
      3 hours ago

      Correct. This is actually against the Privacy Act (PII distributed or stored outside of the borders by an entity holding Australian citizen data), so no doubt the AFP will be looking into this one.