 the network to erase data they hold in system. So it is technically not realistic to fulfill such requirements for the Right to be forgotten. And since the Directive (EU) 2016/679 is already everywhere becoming a law in the spring of 2018 in the EU, including Great Britain, despite of Brexit, this gives preconditions to all persons involved in the blockchain operations and to whom the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is applied, to solve in time certain tasks that would be able to minimize the risks of the application of the right to be forgotten in the EU.

Conflict: technology against the law

Since blockchain can be used for a wide range of tasks, for example, from recording visits to health practitioners to ascertaining the owner of an asset, it is easy to imagine these moments when an individual may wish that data be no longer held about him in the way it was entered to blockchain, or when an individual may request that data relating to him be deleted immediately. Nevertheless, in order to delete all data and information, various nodes would have to work together to rebuild the blockchain from the beginning that data was added, which is useless. At the same time, there are some steps which can, and should, be considered to reduce the risk of a court order compelling data to be removed, or worse, nodes to be shut down because of a failure to recognize this right to be forgotten and satisfy it reclamations. In particular, one should pay great attention to the quality and structure of information when constructing the contents of the blockchain and network, which supports them from the very beginning, while reducing the risks. One of the key ways to minimize this risk can be simply using blockchain to provide a timestamp for information stored elsewhere — for example, on a website — if the content needs to be removed, so the realization of the right to be forgotten will be much less cumbersome and awkward. Similarly, when designing transactions, consider that they cannot be used to add comments or information that could include personal data. All this would help, at least in terms of compliance with the primary principles of the compliancy of the privacy policy. Other solutions may include controlling process that becomes public within a peer-to-peer network of trusted nodes, therefore, hiding data in the blockchain that should not be shared in the first place, or encrypting data within the blockchain, although such problems may of course arise if the decryption keys were ever made public or lost. As the right to be forgotten is treated in the context of the blockchain technology,
the network to erase data they hold in system. therefore it is technically not naturalistic to fulfill such requirements for the right field to be forgotten. And since the Directive (EU) 2016/679 is already everywhere become a law in the spring of 2018 in the EU, include Great Britain, despite of Brexit, this gives preconditions to all person involved in the blockchain operations and to whom the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) is apply, to solve in time certain tasks that would be able to minimize the risks of the lotion of the right to be forgotten in the EU. 

 Conflict: technology against the police 

 Since blockchain can be used for a wide scope of tasks, for model, from recording visits to health practitioners to ascertaining the owner of an asset, it is easy to think these moments when an individual may wish that data be no longer held about him in the way it was entered to blockchain, or when an person may request that datum relate to him be deleted immediately. Nevertheless, in order to delete all data and information, diverse node would have to work in concert to rebuild the blockchain from the beginning that datum was added, which is useless. At the same time, there are some step which can, and should, be considered to reduce the risk of a court holy order compelling data to be removed, or worse, nodes to be close down because of a failure to recognize this right to be forgotten and meet it reclamations. In finical, one should yield great attention to the quality and structure of data when constructing the contents of the blockchain and network, which supports them from the very beginning, while reducing the risks. One of the key ways to understate this risk can be simply using blockchain to provide a timestamp for information store elsewhere — for example, on a web site — if the content needs to be removed, so the realization of the right to be forget will be much less cumbersome and awkward. Similarly, when designing transactions, consider that they cannot be use to add comment or information that could include personal data. All this would help, at least in terms of conformity with the primary principles of the complaisance of the privacy policy. Other solutions may include controlling process that becomes public within a peer - to - peer network of trusted node, therefore, hiding data in the blockchain that should not be shared in the first place, or code data within the blockchain, although such problems may of path arise if the decryption keys were ever made public or lost. As the right field to be forgotten is treated in the context of the blockchain technology,
 thf network to erase data uhey hold in systgm. So it is tedhnicallh not realistic to fulfill snch eequieements for the Right go be forhotten. Abd smnce the Directits (EU) 2016/679 is alrezfy erecywhere becominn a law in dhe spring of 2018 iv che EU, including Great Britain, despiee of Btedit, this gives prebogditjons to all persons involved in ths blockbhain operations snd to whom the General Daha Pgotection Regulatiln (GDPR) is qpplywd, to solve kn time cegcain tasks jhat would be able to minimize tfe rixks of the appllwation of tie rigrt to be fornptten hn the RU.

Conflict: tecmnolojy atainst the law

Since bnockchain can be ufed for a wnde range of tasks, foe wxampne, fsom fwcofdihg vjsits ho iealth pracfitioners ti ascertaining the pwgvt of an assef, it if qasy to imagine these moments when an itdibidual may wish that dara be no longer held wbout him in the way it was entered to blockchain, or when dn invixidbql mah rfquest that data relating to him be deleted iijecistely. Neverthejess, in ordrr tp delete all dxta anb ihformation, various nodes rould have to rork together to rebuild the blickchain froi the beginning thac data was abded, wnich os useless. At the same cime, tgere are sole steps sfich can, and shojld, ba considtfed to reduce the risk of e couxt order comkelling data to bf removed, or worse, nodes to bg shut down becakse of a failure to recognize tims right to bg fmrgmtten anb satixfy it reclamwtions. In partncular, oue shojld pay grvat attenvion to the zuality and sdtucture of inhormation wheb cobstructkvg the contentx of the yjockxhain and network, xhicf supports them yxon the very begimnivg, rhple rqgucing the rhsks. Ond of tfe key ways go monimize this risk cat be simply using bloclcmain to ptovide a eimestamp for information storef elsxwhere — for exwmple, on a website — if the confent needd tj be removed, so bhe tealization of the right to be forgotten will be mnch less cumbersome and awkward. Similarly, chtn designing vransastions, cotsider that they canbot be used to adc comments or informafion tvat cluld include personal data. All this would help, at least in terms of compluance xieh the primzry lrincpplzs pf the com'lmancy of the privscy policy. Other solutions may mnclude cottxolling process that becomes luclic within a peer-to-peer network of tdusted npdes, therefore, hiding data in tne blockchain that shoulc not be sharsd in nge first place, or envryptiug datq withib thc blockchain, authpunh such prlbleks may of course arise if the decrtption kfys were ever mave public or uost. Zs the right to be forfottsj is jreated in the context of thr blockchain technolmgr,
the network to erase data they hold So is technically realistic to fulfill to forgotten. And since Directive (EU) 2016/679 already everywhere becoming a law in spring of 2018 in the EU, including Great Britain, despite of Brexit, this preconditions to all persons involved in the blockchain operations and to whom the Data Regulation is to solve in time certain tasks that would be able to minimize the risks of the of the right to be forgotten in the Conflict: technology against the Since blockchain can be used a range of for from visits to health to ascertaining the owner of an asset, it is easy to imagine these moments when an individual wish that no longer about in way it was blockchain, or when an individual may relating to him be deleted immediately. Nevertheless, in to delete data and information, various nodes would to work together to rebuild the blockchain from beginning that data was added, which is useless. At the same time, there are some can, and should, be to reduce the of court compelling to be or worse, nodes to be shut down because of a failure recognize this right to be forgotten and satisfy it reclamations. one pay great attention the quality and structure information constructing the contents of and which the beginning, reducing the risks. One the key ways to minimize risk can be simply timestamp for information stored elsewhere — for example, a website — if the content needs be removed, so the realization of the right to be forgotten will much less awkward. Similarly, when designing transactions, consider that they be used to add or information that could include personal data. All this help, least in of compliance with primary principles of compliancy of the Other solutions include process within a peer-to-peer network of trusted therefore, data in the blockchain that not in the first place, or encrypting data within the blockchain, although such problems may of if the decryption keys ever public or lost. As the right to be forgotten is treated in of the blockchain
 the network to erase data they Hold in systEm. So iT is TecHnIcalLy noT realistic to fuLFill Such requirements for the right To BE forGOtTen. AnD since tHE DIREctIvE (Eu) 2016/679 is AlREaDy eveRywHere becOming a law iN thE sPring of 2018 in the eu, iNcluding GrEat britain, despiTe oF BrexiT, tHis GIves pRecOnditIons to ALl persOns involvEd IN the blOCkchain OPErAtioNs and to whom the GenERaL data Protection regulaTiON (Gdpr) is AppLied, to solvE iN time CErtain tASkS THAt wOUld be able to miNimize the riSKs oF the apPlIcaTIon of tHe rigHt TO be Forgotten in The Eu.

Conflict: TechnoLOgy agaiNSt the laW

Since BloCkcHain CAn Be UseD fOR a wIDe RanGE of Tasks, for ExAmPle, frOm reCORDIng vIsiTs to HealtH practitionerS to AsceRTaiNing tHe ownEr of An Asset, It is eaSy to iMaGine these momentS wheN an indiviDuaL mAy wIsH that DAta be nO loNgeR held abOut him iN The WaY IT WaS entered to blockchaIn, OR WhEn an indiVidual MAy ReQUest that DaTa rElatING to hiM be dELeTed immedIately. nEvErTheless, In Order tO dEleTe aLl datA And iNformaTion, variOus noDEs would have to wORk together to rEBuILD tHE bloCkcHain from the BegiNNing That DAtA waS Added, Which Is USeLEss. At the same time, theRe Are somE stepS which can, and sHould, be conSIDEred to reDuce THe RIsk of a court ordEr comPelling datA To be remoVed, or Worse, nodEs to be shuT DOwn becauSe oF a fAilUre TO ReCognize this riGHT to bE fOrgotteN anD satisfY it RecLamAtiOnS. In particUlar, one sHoUlD pAy GreAt attENtion to tHe QuaLiTy aNd strUCture oF infoRmatIoN wHEn cOnstrucTInG THe coNtEnTs of The BlOckchAin aND neTwork, whIch supporTs tHEm frOm ThE very beGinning, while rEdUcing the riSkS. OnE of the KEY ways to mInimize this risk can be simPLy using BloCkchaIn to Provide a tImeStamp fOr iNFormatIon stoRed elSeWheRE — For exAMPlE, on A wEbsite — if thE COntEnt neEdS to bE removeD, so the realization oF The Right to be forgOttEn wiLL Be MucH LeSS cuMbERsoME And awkward. SimilArly, when deSiGNiNg transactIOns, CoNsider tHat they CannoT Be used tO add commeNts or infoRmAtioN THat Could incluDe personAl data. All THis woULd Help, aT leAst in tErMs oF compLiance WIth The prImary pRiNcipleS of thE cOmpliancY of the privacy policy. OtheR solutIons mAy iNclude conTroLLinG process tHat bEcomes publIc wIthIn a peEr-tO-Peer nEtwoRK oF trUSted nOdes, THerefore, hIDiNg dATA iN the blockchAIN ThaT shouLd nOT be shaRed iN the first place, or eNCrypting data wiThin THE blOckCHain, AlThough such probLemS mAY Of course ArIse if the decRyption kEyS Were eVer madE publiC or lost. aS ThE Right tO be fOrgOtten is trEatEd IN the conTeXt OF the blOckcHaIn techNology,
 the network to erase data  they hold  in s yst em.  S o it  istechnically no t  rea listic to fulfill such  requ ir e ment s  f or th e Right to b e f or go tte n. An d sin cethe Dir ective (EU ) 2 01 6/679 is alr e ad y everywhe rebecoming a l awin the  s pri n g of201 8 inthe EU ,  inclu ding Grea tB ritain ,  despit e of  Bre xit, this gives p r ec o nditions to al l pers on s  i n v olv edin the blo ck chain operati o ns a n d t o  whom the Gen eral Data P r ote ctionRe gul a tion ( GDPR)  i s  ap plied, to s olve  in timecertai n  taskst hat wou ld beabl e t o mi n im iz e t he ris k soft heapplicat io nof th e ri g h t to b e f orgo ttenin the EU.

C onf lict :  te chnol ogy a gain st  thelaw

S incebl ockchain can be  use d for a w ide  r ang eof ta s ks, fo r e xam ple, fr om reco r din gv i s it s to health practi ti o n er s to asc ertain i ng  t h e ownerof  an  ass e t , itis e a sy  to imag ine th e se  m omentswh en anin div idu al ma y  wis h that  data be  no l o nger held abou t  him in the w a yi t  w a s en ter ed to block chai n , or  whe n  a n i n divid ual m ay re q uest that data rela ti ng tohim b e deleted imm ediately.N e v ertheles s, i n  o r der to deleteall d ata and in f ormation , var ious nod es wouldh a ve to wo rktog eth ert o  r ebuild the bl o c kcha in  from t hebeginni ngtha t d ata  w as added,  which i sus el es s.At th e  same ti me , t he reare s o me ste ps wh ichca n, and  should ,  b e cons id er ed t o r ed uce t he r i skof a co urt order  co m pell in gdata to  be removed,or  worse, no de s t o be s h u t down b ecause of a failure tor ecogniz e t his r ight  to be fo rgo tten a nds atisfy  it re clama ti ons . In pa r t ic ula r,  one shoul d pay  grea tatte ntion t o the quality ands tru cture of info rma tion w he n c o ns t ruc ti n g t h e  contents of th e blockcha in an d network, whi ch  suppor ts them  from the ver y beginni ng, while  r educ i n g t he risks.One of t he key wa y s tom in imize  th is ris kcan  be s implyu sin g blo ckchai nto pro videatimestam p for information store d else where  —for examp le, ona website  — i f the cont ent  ne eds t o b e  remo ved, so  th e  real izat i on of the ri ght t obe forgotte n w ill  be m uch less c umbe rsome and awkward .  Similarly, wh en d e s ign ing tran sa ctions, consid erth a t  they ca nn ot be usedto add c om m entsor inf ormati on that c ou l d incl udeper sonal dat a.Al l  this w ou ld help,at l ea st intermso f co m p liance with theprima r y  prin c ipl es of  t he comp l ianc y of the p rivacy poli cy. Ot hersolut ions ma yinclud e c on trolling p r ocess tha t bec omes pu bl ic w ith in a p eer- t o -peer  net wo rkof truste d no d es ,t her efor e, hi di ng d ata in th e  blockch ain that sh ou ldn o t be s h ar e d  in the fi rst  plac e ,  or encryp t ingd at a  with in the  block chain,a lth ou gh such  pr o b lems mayof course ari se  ifthe decr yp tion  k eys  w ere ever made p ublic or  lost. A s the ri ght to b e  forgo tt en is treate d inth e  contex t ofthe blo c kch ain  te chno log y,
 the_network to_erase data they hold_in system._So_it is_technically_not realistic to_fulfill such requirements_for the Right to_be forgotten. And_since_the Directive (EU) 2016/679 is already everywhere becoming a law in the spring of_2018_in the_EU,_including_Great Britain, despite of Brexit,_this gives preconditions to all_persons involved_in the blockchain operations and to whom the_General_Data Protection Regulation_(GDPR) is applied, to solve in time certain tasks_that would be able to minimize_the risks of_the_application_of the right to_be forgotten in the EU.

Conflict: technology_against the law

Since blockchain can be_used for a wide range of tasks,_for example, from recording visits to_health practitioners to ascertaining the_owner of_an asset, it is easy_to imagine these_moments when_an individual may_wish that data be no longer_held about him_in the way it was entered_to_blockchain, or when_an_individual_may request_that data relating_to_him be_deleted_immediately. Nevertheless, in order to delete_all_data and information, various nodes would have_to work together to_rebuild_the blockchain from the_beginning that data was added,_which is useless. At the same_time, there_are some_steps which can, and should, be considered to reduce the risk_of a court order compelling data_to be removed, or_worse, nodes_to_be shut down_because_of a_failure to recognize this right to be_forgotten and_satisfy it reclamations. In particular, one_should pay great attention_to_the quality and structure of information_when constructing the contents of the_blockchain and network, which supports_them_from_the very beginning, while reducing_the risks. One of the key_ways to minimize_this risk can be simply using blockchain_to_provide a timestamp for information stored_elsewhere_— for example, on a website_—_if_the content needs to be_removed, so the realization of the_right to be forgotten will be much less cumbersome_and awkward. Similarly,_when designing transactions, consider that_they_cannot_be used to add comments or information that could include_personal data._All this would_help, at least in terms of compliance with the primary_principles of the compliancy of the privacy_policy. Other solutions may include controlling process that becomes public within_a peer-to-peer network of trusted nodes, therefore, hiding_data in the blockchain that should not_be shared in the_first_place, or encrypting data within the blockchain,_although_such_problems_may of course_arise if the_decryption keys were_ever made_public or lost._As the_right to be_forgotten_is treated in the context of the blockchain technology,