You can phrase it any way you want, like "If adding regulations with potential fines even on mistakes to bankrupt a company, then maybe regulators need a rethin

You can phrase it any way you want, like "If adding regulations with potential fines even on mistakes to bankrupt a company, then maybe regulators need a rethink". Why is everyone so focused on what the intention of the rules are and not the practicalities? Often I feel these regulations are throwing spaghetti against a wall praying it sticks (e.g. cookie law). Because there's a problem, so the government must solve it. People can't be asked to self-regulate and governments can't be asked to encourage alternatives. It should be after those alternatives fail that the law is used as a last resort, and even then, marginally until the impacts are understood.