11–20 of 94 posts
GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.
GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.
GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.
I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.
I'm working on GDPR right now at my company, and it's not a small effort.
While GDPR in itself has accomplished the goal of raising awareness on data security and transparency, probably only temporarily, the mind numbingly idiotic push-button based consent model is an utter failure. 99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle have to read through. It's an extension of th…
99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle has to read through. No offense, but this feels like a “99%” and “most” that is something less than rigorous. I don’t think sound arguments for or against GDPR can come from the “Ah Reckon” space. Throwing out made-up numbers that just represent personal…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.
I'm not talking about corporations which have the means and the resources to engineer data pipelines that can be scrubbed and lawyers to deal with compliance. I'm speaking to the issue of you or I creating an MVP with a few months of dedicated hard work. How much extra time has to be spent on putting in place a process for data deletion? I'm working on GDPR right now at my company, and it's not a small effort.
GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.
I highly doubt that Google is pleased with the current situation as the article implies.
While GDPR in itself has accomplished the goal of raising awareness on data security and transparency, probably only temporarily, the mind numbingly idiotic push-button based consent model is an utter failure. 99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle have to read through. It's an extension of th…
99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle has to read through. No offense, but this feels like a “99%” and “most” that is something less than rigorous. I don’t think sound arguments for or against GDPR can come from the “Ah Reckon” space. Throwing out made-up numbers that just represent personal…
I've read the contracts I have to sign, and generally this throws people off drastically. When I ask, they tell me I'm the first to read them. Things like leases at a place that has been around decades and I'm the first to sit down and read before signing. While it isn't rigorous, from my experience with wet ink legal documents, saying 1% do read EULAs and privacy policies is a very optimistic over estimation by magnitudes.
While GDPR in itself has accomplished the goal of raising awareness on data security and transparency, probably only temporarily, the mind numbingly idiotic push-button based consent model is an utter failure. 99% of people don't read anything before they push yes. Most people get increasingly annoyed at the mountain of e-mails, and the hundreds of pages they in principle have to read through. It's an extension of th…
It'd be less kafkaesque if the fucking ad industry could use a cookie to store my consent once I have given it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.
I'm not talking about corporations which have the means and the resources to engineer data pipelines that can be scrubbed and lawyers to deal with compliance. I'm speaking to the issue of you or I creating an MVP with a few months of dedicated hard work. How much extra time has to be spent on putting in place a process for data deletion? I'm working on GDPR right now at my company, and it's not a small effort.
None. Do not target the EU initially, start in the US market with your MVP. It's by far the most liberal major market to do an MVP in, in all regards. It's the world's largest economy and easily accessible; plus you essentially get Canada as a bonus: a combined $21.5 trillion in economy. Entirely disregard GDPR until you've scaled the business enough to afford whatever you've calculated GDPR compliance will cost you in terms of effort / resources, then push into the EU when it's convenient.
GDPR is yet another moat for established companies. It may take them some time to adapt their data models and engineer systems for data deletion, but once they have done so, it becomes something every startup will have to implement in order to compete. I'm not saying GDPR isn't good for privacy (we need it); it just makes competition harder.
I think of it like outlawing chemical pollution of rivers. Yes, a Corporation that manages not to dump toxic waste in rivers is going to have a moat against smaller companies that do dump toxic waste in rivers. But I'd rather it be illegal than have companies competing for who can externalize their costs more effectively by passing their problem of waste management to the state / local area.