Aileen Cannon, a 38 year-old lawyer with no judicial experience and limited resume, was handed a LIFETIME appointment as a federal judge just as Trump left office. Cannon's primary credentials for the job were apparently her young age and membership in the Federalist Society. 1/5

Her professional experience was so limited that she was forced to admit on her Sen Judiciary Comm questionnaire that she had never made any speeches, produced any reports, participated in any panel discussions, spoke at any conferences or written for any bar association. 2/5
In her twelve years as a lawyer, she published no writings of her own and just 3 writings done with colleagues at Gibson Dunn -- limited to promotional articles on cases handled by the firm for their own website. 3/5
In an attempt to show writing experience, Cannon listed 17 short articles from a 2-mo undergrad stint at El Nuevo Herald. ranging from "Prenatal Yoga" to "Flamenco: An Explosion of Energy and Passion." Cannon is unclear on whether she authored or simply edited the articles. 4/5
Finally, the questionnaire for a LIFETIME judicial appt asks Cannon to list all interviews she has given to the media. Cannon lists only her wedding article in a local magazine as her only media experience.(5/5)

You May Also Like

Recently, the @CNIL issued a decision regarding the GDPR compliance of an unknown French adtech company named "Vectaury". It may seem like small fry, but the decision has potential wide-ranging impacts for Google, the IAB framework, and today's adtech. It's thread time! 👇

It's all in French, but if you're up for it you can read:
• Their blog post (lacks the most interesting details):
https://t.co/PHkDcOT1hy
• Their high-level legal decision: https://t.co/hwpiEvjodt
• The full notification: https://t.co/QQB7rfynha

I've read it so you needn't!

Vectaury was collecting geolocation data in order to create profiles (eg. people who often go to this or that type of shop) so as to power ad targeting. They operate through embedded SDKs and ad bidding, making them invisible to users.

The @CNIL notes that profiling based off of geolocation presents particular risks since it reveals people's movements and habits. As risky, the processing requires consent — this will be the heart of their assessment.

Interesting point: they justify the decision in part because of how many people COULD be targeted in this way (rather than how many have — though they note that too). Because it's on a phone, and many have phones, it is considered large-scale processing no matter what.