5 ms·

Yeah, but wouldn't cutting 500 million of the wealthiest customers from your solution have a pretty significant business impact?

aldoushuxley001 8y ago
Not as significant as curtailing free-speech. Some things don't have a price tag.
briandear 8y ago
Google left China; a far bigger market than Europe.
- pimmen 8y ago
  But it's also far riskier, at leats this time they were assaulted by a law in the EU parliament. In China, the party could just decide they don't like you and get rid of your business.
- snaky 8y ago
  > Now, Google appears to be changing its mind. Under a plan called Dragonfly, the company has been testing a censored version of its search engine for the Chinese market. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/technology/google-china-conventionality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/technology/google-china-c...
nordsieck 8y ago
> Yeah, but wouldn't cutting 500 million of the wealthiest customers from your solution have a pretty significant business impact? It seems likely that large internet businesses will probably pay to comply with GDPR. Many small businesses, whose customers are often mostly regional anyhow, may decide that it's just not worth the cost of compliance.
- dominotw 8y ago
  > may decide that it's just not worth the cost of compliance. You cannot not comply with it though.
  - nordsieck 8y ago
    > You cannot not comply with it though. Why is that? One of the big reasons people and companies comply with the law is that they don't want to suffer the consequences of non-compliance. If a company has no assets, customers or business relationships in Europe, what is a GDPR judgement against them going to do?
    - dominotw 8y ago
      > customers or business relationships in Europe, Customers don't have to be in Europe, it applies to european citizens living in your country.
      - deleted 8y ago
        [deleted]
      - contrahax 8y ago
        Good luck enforcing EU laws in the United States - I'm sure our government would be thrilled to extradite US Citizens (who have never been to the EU) for GDPR violations.
      - bhelkey 8y ago
        > If the Data Subject, moves out of the EU border and say becomes an expat, or goes on holiday then their personal data processed under these circumstances is not covered by the GDPR and they are no longer a Data Subject in the context of the GDPR, unless their data is still processed by an organisation "established" in the EU. https://cybercounsel.co.uk/data-subjects/ https://cybercounsel.co.uk/data-subjects/
        komodosquirrel 8y ago
        Do you have a source? (Not some blog)
- lexs 8y ago
  Complying with the GDPR is not really a cost thing, unless you count loss of revenue from not squeezing everything you can out of user data.
  - komali2 8y ago
    I think the fear is that troll law firms will sprout up that get really good and nailing smaller companies for a minor, relatively harmless infraction.
    - stefano 8y ago
      What would they gain? The company would get a warning from an officer telling them they're not compliant and to address it. If the company fixes the issue, all good. If it doesn't, it gets fined. The troll law firm won't see any money from that fine.
    - DanBC 8y ago
      That's not how GDPR is enforced. A relatively minor, harmless infraction will get at most a letter from the regulator asking for it to be fixed. More likely is that fuck all will happen, which is what currently happens in the UK.
      - komali2 8y ago
        Huh, I thought it was grounds for a hefty fine right off the bat. What about horns being trumpeted that GDPR is going to stifle innovation (smaller companies unable to muster the legal force to comply)?
        jinglebells 8y ago
        They want you to comply, first and foremost. If you comply, then no fines. If you don't comply, you'll get fined, that's how I understand. GDPR is a process, it's about pushing companies to good practices through compliance. A lot of it makes sense, for example, making sure your staff understand basic IT security practices, which is no different to health and safety.

aldoushuxley001 8y ago

Not as significant as curtailing free-speech. Some things don't have a price tag.

briandear 8y ago

Google left China; a far bigger market than Europe.

pimmen 8y ago
But it's also far riskier, at leats this time they were assaulted by a law in the EU parliament. In China, the party could just decide they don't like you and get rid of your business.
snaky 8y ago
> Now, Google appears to be changing its mind. Under a plan called Dragonfly, the company has been testing a censored version of its search engine for the Chinese market. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/technology/google-china-conventionality.html https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/22/technology/google-china-c...

nordsieck 8y ago

> Yeah, but wouldn't cutting 500 million of the wealthiest customers from your solution have a pretty significant business impact? It seems likely that large internet businesses will probably pay to comply with GDPR. Many small businesses, whose customers are often mostly regional anyhow, may decide that it's just not worth the cost of compliance.

dominotw 8y ago
> may decide that it's just not worth the cost of compliance. You cannot not comply with it though.
- nordsieck 8y ago
  > You cannot not comply with it though. Why is that? One of the big reasons people and companies comply with the law is that they don't want to suffer the consequences of non-compliance. If a company has no assets, customers or business relationships in Europe, what is a GDPR judgement against them going to do?
  - dominotw 8y ago
    > customers or business relationships in Europe, Customers don't have to be in Europe, it applies to european citizens living in your country.
    - deleted 8y ago
      [deleted]
    - contrahax 8y ago
      Good luck enforcing EU laws in the United States - I'm sure our government would be thrilled to extradite US Citizens (who have never been to the EU) for GDPR violations.
    - bhelkey 8y ago
      > If the Data Subject, moves out of the EU border and say becomes an expat, or goes on holiday then their personal data processed under these circumstances is not covered by the GDPR and they are no longer a Data Subject in the context of the GDPR, unless their data is still processed by an organisation "established" in the EU. https://cybercounsel.co.uk/data-subjects/ https://cybercounsel.co.uk/data-subjects/
      - komodosquirrel 8y ago
        Do you have a source? (Not some blog)
lexs 8y ago
Complying with the GDPR is not really a cost thing, unless you count loss of revenue from not squeezing everything you can out of user data.
- komali2 8y ago
  I think the fear is that troll law firms will sprout up that get really good and nailing smaller companies for a minor, relatively harmless infraction.
  - stefano 8y ago
    What would they gain? The company would get a warning from an officer telling them they're not compliant and to address it. If the company fixes the issue, all good. If it doesn't, it gets fined. The troll law firm won't see any money from that fine.
  - DanBC 8y ago
    That's not how GDPR is enforced. A relatively minor, harmless infraction will get at most a letter from the regulator asking for it to be fixed. More likely is that fuck all will happen, which is what currently happens in the UK.
    - komali2 8y ago
      Huh, I thought it was grounds for a hefty fine right off the bat. What about horns being trumpeted that GDPR is going to stifle innovation (smaller companies unable to muster the legal force to comply)?
      - jinglebells 8y ago
        They want you to comply, first and foremost. If you comply, then no fines. If you don't comply, you'll get fined, that's how I understand. GDPR is a process, it's about pushing companies to good practices through compliance. A lot of it makes sense, for example, making sure your staff understand basic IT security practices, which is no different to health and safety.