141–150 of 285 posts
So Facebook, google, Microsoft, et al, will continue to sell my attention, and now pass the insurance bill onto me. Lol. I know, it’s for my security.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You read that wrong. In order to NOT be a "covered entity," you must meet ALL of the following criteria: 1) Revenue of less than $50 million; AND 2) Must not have info on 1 million or more people; AND 3) cannot be a data broker That means an independent app developer who gets more than 1 million installs, or a website with more than 1 million users, IS a covered entity, regardless of revenue . Also, ANY "data broker,…
Phew! That would be a net positive for the world, long term, to bear less of a greasy footprint from american startup antics.
I read this and immediately thought "oh shit, yet another regulation for a small bootstrapped software business where we try to be honest while the big guys will still find a way to circumvent it". Thankfully, I looked into the fine print and was wrong. This bill is only for Corporations that do over $50,000,000 in revenues or higher OR (EDITED from AND) have info on at least 1,000,000 or more customers. Of course, I…
So then big corps do all their customer information risking behavior in spun out small wholly owned subsidiaries or even arms length non owned ones and if successful acquire them for some fixed amount but if they screw up with this law the company just folds and the parent is free from financial damage.
Why are bills like these always drafted after the fact? E.g. Equifax, Google+, Facebook hack, etc. It would be common sense to pass laws before it happened and would of incentivize companies to beef up security.
When a problem is known and risk judged high enough to outweigh the costs mentioned above, a proactive bill can be introduced.
(Or, at least this is how it's supposed to work; in practice, you also need to add politics and lobbying to the mix.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i would pay $2/month at most for facebook.
$50bn/year would be more revenue than fb had in 2017, though of course the majority of their 2.23bn monthly users would disappear if asked for $.01/mo. It is an interesting thought experiment, though, to consider what facebook would look like if its revenue was derived from convincing users that it was worth a monthly subscription.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You read that wrong. In order to NOT be a "covered entity," you must meet ALL of the following criteria: 1) Revenue of less than $50 million; AND 2) Must not have info on 1 million or more people; AND 3) cannot be a data broker That means an independent app developer who gets more than 1 million installs, or a website with more than 1 million users, IS a covered entity, regardless of revenue . Also, ANY "data broker,…
I corrected my And to an OR so yes, good point but overall, it still doesn't impact "entire startup community". There are plenty of tech. businesses that don't hit 50 Million in revenue AND don't have a million users. I am talking about those.
I don't think it will pass as is, but if it does, this is truly a "sky is falling" moment for US startups. Because it effectively limits non-VC backed startups to less than 1M users, it also makes sure that there will never be a competitor to Facebook or Google. Like GDPR, it locks in entrenched competitors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i would pay $2/month at most for facebook.
$50bn/year would be more revenue than fb had in 2017, though of course the majority of their 2.23bn monthly users would disappear if asked for $.01/mo. It is an interesting thought experiment, though, to consider what facebook would look like if its revenue was derived from convincing users that it was worth a monthly subscription.
I topped up my FB balance with like $2 or $5 dollars, in ?2006?. When Facebook (quickly) discontinued that silliness, my account silently disappeared. MARK ZUCKERBERG, YOU OWE ME MONEY!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Phew! That would be a net positive for the world, long term, to bear less of a greasy footprint from american startup antics.
No, it would kill all American software/web startups by limiting them to 999,999 users, unless they have millions of dollars in VC funding that they can use to comply with this law. It would strangle the startup community, as most startups (even those with 1M+ users) can never hope to have the resources to comply. You have to remember that the reason that startups get any funding is because investors hope that they w…