3 ms·

Thanks for engaging with me. This has been a fun thread! > I think most Americans (including me) would still put Article 83 in the "fuzzy standards of reasonab

by hluska 9y ago

Thanks for engaging with me. This has been a fun thread! > I think most Americans (including me) would still put Article 83 in the "fuzzy standards of reasonableness" category Is it valid to say that you're not wrong, but I disagree? :) I agree that article 83 will be hard to interpret if people act in bad faith. But, it provides a good framework for how to act in good faith. I would argue that if you genuinely care about your users and their data, you'll likely be okay unless something fucked up happens. And when something fucked up happens, as long as you're transparent, respectful and helpful, you'll still likely be okay unless something really fucked up happens. And then, you'll have bigger things to worry about anyways, so fuck the GDPR. :) > I agree that it probably works in practice, but I wouldn't see it as much of a constraint. Like, how closely would you expect the rulings of two independent judges each assessing a fine according to these guidelines to match? I completely agree with you. Unfortunately, vast parts of the American/Canadian justice systems would also fail this test. > Also: Doesn't the extraterritoriality bother you? It sure does. The extraterritoriality is first class bullshit. But, if current European data protection laws are any guide, it will mostly be used as a tool to gently encourage compliance and actual punishments will be very rare.

tripletao 9y ago
I appreciate the chance to get (what I presume is) a European perspective on this. I think Americans are just generally less trustful of government, domestic or foreign, and therefore less trustful of regulatory discretion. There are vague American laws too, like "honest services fraud"; but 1. We complain about those too. 2. The dangers of extraterritoriality and vagueness seem synergistic. A major check on regulators' discretion is political will, and screwing foreigners tends to be a lot more popular than screwing your own citizens. The ideal tax is one on foreigners living abroad... I think the GDPR will probably be fine, and have net positive effects even as it pushes small, essentially-compliant but risk-averse operators out of the EU. I find its legal basis troubling.
- hluska 9y ago
  Actually, I'm Canadian and I don't consider myself very trusting of government. I've always seen the EU as a natural place for my startups, so I've made a point of learning as much about EU economic policy as I can. At first, I found the glut of it to be incredibly scary, but then I was lucky to have a series of European roommates when I was in business school. One time, I was afraid of some anti-corruption laws because it seemed like basic parts of doing business here would result in severe penalties there. My roommate at the time thought I was being certifiably insane, because the EU just doesn't work like that. He couldn't imagine what transgression I could possibly commit to warrant more than a strongly worded letter (on better stationery than I'd get from the Canadian government). From there, I started learning more about how open the EU is. I mentioned this in another comment, but I'll also encourage you to read about the International Procurement Instrument. The EU (like many other economic bodies) has trouble with non-EU companies bidding on EU public contracts and winning because the playing fields just aren't level. I don't want to give too much of the story away, but as you read about the IPI meandering its way through European politics, you can see an EU bending over backwards to make sure that foreign companies have open access to EU markets. If you read about the IPI with North American eyes, it seems absolutely bizarre. But it's a good primer to the EU's difficulty with protectionism. I'm from western Canada and seriouslu, if the Canadian government felt this way about protectionism, I could get a western independent movement off the ground in a matter of months...not that I would or would even want to, but it would be so egregiously opposite how we do things that radicalism would ensue. Sorry for droning on and on, but I don't think I can really debate you. I agree with you and everything you're saying is logical. My only response is that Europe is so incredibly different and that response is honestly starting to wear thin. Besides, I'm being a shitty entrepreneur. The more people are afraid of GDPR, the more opportunity I'll get!! :) (I've enjoyed this talk with you. Thanks for engaging with me!)

by hluska 9y ago

tripletao 9y ago

I appreciate the chance to get (what I presume is) a European perspective on this. I think Americans are just generally less trustful of government, domestic or foreign, and therefore less trustful of regulatory discretion. There are vague American laws too, like "honest services fraud"; but 1. We complain about those too. 2. The dangers of extraterritoriality and vagueness seem synergistic. A major check on regulators' discretion is political will, and screwing foreigners tends to be a lot more popular than screwing your own citizens. The ideal tax is one on foreigners living abroad... I think the GDPR will probably be fine, and have net positive effects even as it pushes small, essentially-compliant but risk-averse operators out of the EU. I find its legal basis troubling.

hluska 9y ago
Actually, I'm Canadian and I don't consider myself very trusting of government. I've always seen the EU as a natural place for my startups, so I've made a point of learning as much about EU economic policy as I can. At first, I found the glut of it to be incredibly scary, but then I was lucky to have a series of European roommates when I was in business school. One time, I was afraid of some anti-corruption laws because it seemed like basic parts of doing business here would result in severe penalties there. My roommate at the time thought I was being certifiably insane, because the EU just doesn't work like that. He couldn't imagine what transgression I could possibly commit to warrant more than a strongly worded letter (on better stationery than I'd get from the Canadian government). From there, I started learning more about how open the EU is. I mentioned this in another comment, but I'll also encourage you to read about the International Procurement Instrument. The EU (like many other economic bodies) has trouble with non-EU companies bidding on EU public contracts and winning because the playing fields just aren't level. I don't want to give too much of the story away, but as you read about the IPI meandering its way through European politics, you can see an EU bending over backwards to make sure that foreign companies have open access to EU markets. If you read about the IPI with North American eyes, it seems absolutely bizarre. But it's a good primer to the EU's difficulty with protectionism. I'm from western Canada and seriouslu, if the Canadian government felt this way about protectionism, I could get a western independent movement off the ground in a matter of months...not that I would or would even want to, but it would be so egregiously opposite how we do things that radicalism would ensue. Sorry for droning on and on, but I don't think I can really debate you. I agree with you and everything you're saying is logical. My only response is that Europe is so incredibly different and that response is honestly starting to wear thin. Besides, I'm being a shitty entrepreneur. The more people are afraid of GDPR, the more opportunity I'll get!! :) (I've enjoyed this talk with you. Thanks for engaging with me!)