271–280 of 373 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What a deranged idea, you're implying it's okay to bankrupt a company just for a minor privacy violation.
Oh, I think it is totally ok to bankrupt a company for not following the law.
I assume you also support the death penalty for J walking?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Interesting turn of phrase “oppressed corporations” A lot of fun stuff to think about with that
The oppressor is the lawmaker, who has infinite power over the corporations. "oppressed corporations" is a phenomenon that can and does exist in this context.
Can a sculptor oppress his sculpture?
This feels like musing about the nature of property- Like how many people think property is some sort of natural phenomenon, when it's actually a legal concept defined by the state.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If respecting privacy prevents tech companies from forming, then we should all be celebrating when those tech companies fail to form.
this is a naive take. companies will still be formed. they will just http 451 all EU users. like threads does right now. this will also mean losing out, but i guess europeans are used to losing out, and actually prefer it?
If Threads gains traction in the other parts, of course they will launch it EU wide.
The EU is often a too big market to be ignored, see Apple and USB C for example. They caved and released the iPhone 15 with that connector now for the whole world. Companies wanting to do business will need to adapt.
I dont think Tiktok will close up shop here to be honest.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
What sort of fine would you consider not to be a drop in the bucket? This fine looks to be an estimated 1/8 of TikTok's profit in 2022.
10 years of gross revenue, 4 years in jail for the CEO and any other liable individuals.
Why go that route instead of claiming its assets in the jurisdiction and revoking its right to operate?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The EU is about to vote banning on end-to-end encryption which makes them quite evil in my books. https://www.wired.com/story/europe-break-encryption-leaked-d...
That's the whole point of a democracy, you vote on things like this. The flip side is that anyone can put to a vote all sorts of stupid things they don't understand.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>Are they supposed to get their legs cut off just for breaking one law Yes, they wont learn otherwise.
[flagged]
We do have to keep people around if they behave in ways that harm society, but society is not morally bound to keep companies existing despite them misbehaving. They are not living conscious entities. They are organizations created for the purpose of accumulating money. And if they cannot do that without violating the laws, then they should be dissolved.
That's not an "authoritarian mindset". That's just the mindset "the law applies to everyone".
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If the fine wasn't high enough to disincentivize, it just means we'll have to set the next one higher until we find a point where it works.
I’ve noticed Americans tend to think of laws in terms of… computer code, almost, which isn’t true even for America. But in that view, the fine is whatever size it is and if it isn’t enough, too bad. …that isn’t how Europe works.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How else would regulation work?
[flagged]
So the fine seems appropriate to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Lots of European companies have gotten fined. But also, primarily European companies did generally take it a lot more seriously than multinationals. (Sometimes too seriously; while this has calmed down a bit, you'll sometimes see companies enforcing absolutely absurd policies around data on the basis that they incorrectly think they're required for compliance).
In my experience, this is absolutely not true. Sometimes mind-boggling so. For example, it was US companies that stopped serving ads until they had GDPR infrastructure in place, while some very bad actors in the UK where not collecting consent at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
10 years of gross revenue, 4 years in jail for the CEO and any other liable individuals.
10 years of gross revenue is an actual death penalty for a company. Why go that route instead of claiming its assets in the jurisdiction and revoking its right to operate?