Earlier quoted context omitted.
> since to a first approximation, zero consumers take advantage of data privacy laws. That's where that nice multiplier of 250,000 gets going. See, even if to a first approximation zero consumers take advantage of these laws if it turns out that 'approximately zero' out of 100 million is say 10,000 you're still fucked if you decide to play dumb. So round off all you want, but keep in mind the multiplier.
No, because of that multiplier all companies are coming into compliance and it's costing all of them a lot of money. But it isn't going to affect their revenue or advertising business models at all because nobody uses the tool. I've done GDPR work at one of the biggest tech companies in the world. They had an existing (pre-GDPR) privacy tool that literally less than 100 people had ever used. This is a company with hu…
One company isn't a particularly solid sample.
For some contrast: I've looked at 9 companies since the beginning of the year and all of them took the GDPR serious enough that it made them re-evaluate their privacy, security and data life cycles. The interesting bit is that they would have never done any of that if not for the GDPR, and that no matter what level of use the data privacy tools will see it doesn't matter because before they didn't have those tools and now they do.
Besides that the GDPR has much wider scope than just allowing people access to their own data. Also, you should expect that as people become more aware of these things - and consumers will be more aware - that such tools will see more use.