The experiment that allowed users and businesses to protect personal Big Data on Facebook has failed, as more and more stories come to light describing some of the consequences in the real world (see recent elections in the United States).
As it turns out, the ball will be passed on to governments that should do something directly to protect personal data. 
But this approach has shown that lawmakers often vote on the first bill to be voted on, without looking for the best approach. It should be mentioned here that almost most of them do not fully understand the essence but also the terminology of a huge business like Facebook.
The need to limit Facebook has become apparent after the disclosure of its actions Cambridge Analytica and you surely deceive yourself if you think it was an isolated incident.
Shortly thereafter, Localblox, a company from Washington, who had collected 48 million personal profiles from services such as Facebook, LinkedIn, and Twitter without the user's consent, was revealed. This story became much worse when it was revealed that the data was being stored on an AWS S3 server without a password.
It is certain that there are many dumps of data on the web, but we only hear about these are discovered.
A recent survey by Australia-based analytics firm Telsyte found that 38% of respondents “followed the ethical use of their customer data” and expressed concerns that customers were able to share information them without understanding what they had consented to.
According to the survey, 53% of respondents said they were "willing to share the data if there is a tangible benefit to their company".
This number should trigger an alert for those who are interested in limiting profits from collecting and distributing personal data. If more than half of respondents were so comfortable to admit that they would share data that did not belong to them, then we can assume that the actual number will be much larger.
Here we have to mention him European Regulation on General Data Protection which is due to enter into force next month. The regulation will essentially remind businesses of the delicacy of collecting and holding user data.
And while Facebook was basically caught on the leek to promote its users' data, the company allegedly tries to avoid GDPR where possible, or if he can not at least try to limit his scope
Even the Mark Zuckerberg can see where the train is headed, as he tried to direct lawmakers in his recent appearance in Congress USA.
Legislators seemed to be reconciling and want to work with the social network for future regulations. It's like asking JP Morgan to help draft competition laws. But the raw reality is a company that even monitors people who have not joined the service. Η αντιμετώπιση των γερουσιαστών από την άλλη (εκτός πολύ λίγων εξαιρέσεων) έδειξε ότι δεν κατανοούν πλήρως τη σοβαρότητα του theme.
Facebook is a company that buys annual revenue of 41 billion dollars and earned 16 billion last year. Which of these senators can take back the data and force Facebook to erase all personal data collected by developers, companies, and researchers? The data was collected, analyzed and continues to be analyzed and of course sold for sale worldwide.
Yes, nothing can be done to get back personal data that has already been delivered to analyzers, so there should be emphasis on limiting the damage.
Legislative change is needed and the GDPR is a good start in Europe. But what really needs to be done is to give users as much power as possible, in order to reduce the amount of data circulating…
But the voice of the users does not sound, following a daily routine that brought us here. The GDPR announcement, and the decision of the US Senators to intervene with restrictive laws, chose us, who else wants the responsibility, and who has the appetite and energy to put them with a giant?
But you will not be complaining then, yes, with the next scandal.
