The GDPR does not care about the specifics of tech.
The GDPR does not care if FB has a database column for “sexuality” or if FB never gathers that information directly. All it cares about is the fact that Facebook process personal data, and, using some of the data Facebook processes, sexuality can be inferred.
I think we in tech get hung up on technicalities, while the GDPR was specifically written to be as citizen-focussed and tech-agnostic as possible.
Regardless, this specific ruling seems a bit odd-it implies that FB took a fact he mentioned in a panel discussion (not on the platform), and used that information to serve him targeted ads based on his sexuality.
I have no idea of the mechanisms he supposes led to this.
The GDPR does not care if FB has a database column for “sexuality” or if FB never gathers that information directly. All it cares about is the fact that Facebook process personal data, and, using some of the data Facebook processes, sexuality can be inferred.
I think we in tech get hung up on technicalities, while the GDPR was specifically written to be as citizen-focussed and tech-agnostic as possible.
Regardless, this specific ruling seems a bit odd-it implies that FB took a fact he mentioned in a panel discussion (not on the platform), and used that information to serve him targeted ads based on his sexuality.
I have no idea of the mechanisms he supposes led to this.