3 ms·

> This reads to me like a warmonger justifying innocent casualties. Surely you don't believe this only takes out the bad do you? How would it take out GDPR com

• kodablah 8y ago
  Because the risk and costs of compliance are borne by all, not just the non-compliant. I would hope that "but laws only affect the bad guys" or "if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about" would no longer be reasonable arguments these days.
  • kinsomo 8y ago
    > Because the risk and costs of compliance are borne by all, not just the non-compliant. I would hope that "but laws only affect the bad guys" or "if you're doing nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about" would no longer be reasonable arguments these days. That's like saying that drug regulations are bad, because all opiate producers take on "the risk and costs of compliance," not just the street pushers. The whole point is to actually raise standards for all of society. What you're criticizing is enforcing higher standards than the current status quo.
    • kodablah 8y ago
      If you had used drug laws, e.g. marijuana laws, in your analogy it would make more sense. They think they are raising standards too. It's not about what the point is, it is about the implementation. It's so tough to have reasonable discourse about the topic because if you are against the approach people think you are against the whole point.