The assessment of the team was that we did need to make a change & the local API was the choice they made. Note that Mendeley had no way to know who was interacting with the local DB, so it made sense to ask people what they're doing with it.
-
-
Replying to @mrgunn @danstillman and
Right, but they were *wrong*, weren't they? The change really was superfluous. The gdpr requires no such thing, in particular.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @leastfixedpoint @mrgunn and
Or, I mean, I'd love to hear the argument in favour of such a requirement.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @leastfixedpoint @danstillman and
In the assessment of the team, either encryption or modification of the DB was necessary and the dev team chose encryption +API as the best choice, because it provides a pathway to future support, even as the underlying DB structure changes.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mrgunn @danstillman and
Yes, you said, but I can't see how they can possibly have come to that conclusion. I think that's what's perplexing people, the unanswered question of why the change seemed warranted. No other database program has done anything comparable to my knowledge.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @leastfixedpoint @danstillman and
I wish I could give you more clarity about this, but I will say that Mendeley is different in terms of what is in the DB. Hopefully Mendeley will eventually do that blog post.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mrgunn @leastfixedpoint and
This is hand-wavy nonsense. It’s a DB of bibliographic data and notes. Even email clients, with generally far more sensitive materials, don’t encrypt their local databases. The OS does. The only reason to do this is to prevent programs like Zotero from directly accessing the DB.
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
-
Replying to @zeynep @danstillman and
I the absence of information, it's common to resort to conspiracy theories, but no, there are legitimate reasons & you're (still) welcome to speak to the team about them.
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Setting aside whether or no there are indeed legitimate reasons, you have to admit the structural similarity of "trust us there are very good reasons we can't tell you about" to, oh, the tired old national security justifications for any old bad behaviour is a bit on the nose.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
Also logical nonsense. Being treated like we’re idiots. There’s only one company that’s done at Mendeley has done “is response to GDPR”—somehow not affecting GDPR requirements but oh so coincidentally shutting out the free, non-profit competitor. With no feasible explanation.
-
-
Replying to @zeynep @leastfixedpoint and
You are making three assertions, I think: a) what other programs have done is relevant b) there's no feasible explanation c) Zotero is shut out. a) it isn't. b) The changes were needed for user privacy, ongoing db maintenance, & API support. c) They aren't shut out.
2 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @mrgunn @leastfixedpoint and
Okay. Point me to this "feasible" explanation from your employer, in the form of a corporate statement, explaining how and guaranteeing Zotero users can easily access THEIR OWN DATA. Have your employer explain this. https://eighty-twenty.org/2018/06/13/mendeley-encrypted-db …
1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.