5 ms·

> Anyone bashing the GDPR for being too hostile towards startups and smaller businesses should read this. Looks like the fine was almost a bit too low in this c

> Anyone bashing the GDPR for being too hostile towards startups and smaller businesses should read this. Looks like the fine was almost a bit too low in this case... You make it seem like that's supposed to be assuring? Essentially, small companies and startups are left to the whims of bunch of bureaucrats. The fact that they have to make the fine "almost a bit too low" just shows you what a terrible thing GDPR is.

Angostura 8y ago
> Essentially, small companies and startups that break the law are left to the whims of bunch of bureaucrats. Fixed that for you. There's a way for small companies to avoid this - take your user's data security at least slightly seriously
- thanosnose 8y ago
  So sad to see reddit leaking into HN. > There's a way for small companies to avoid this - take your user's data security at least slightly seriously No kidding. My point wasn't about that. My point is that the bureaucrats chose not to apply the law - "Looks like the fine was almost a bit too low in this case..." AKA leaving the fines/punishment to the whims of bureaucrats. If even the bureaucrats are refusing to enforce the law correctly, it usually implies that there is something wrong with the law.
  - majewsky 8y ago
    > If even the bureaucrats are refusing to enforce the law correctly The law says "up to [that much of a fine]", not "exactly [that much of a fine]".
    - thanosnose 8y ago
      AKA, "up to the whims of a bureaucrat"? My god the pro-GPDR brigade is running wild.
      - ceejayoz 8y ago
        There are very few punishments in Western democracies not subject to some level of judgement call. Until we've got AIs, questions like "was this deliberate" and "how much non-monetary harm was caused" will require a human (or group of them) to make a call.
        kiriakasis 8y ago
        And even with the most perfect AIs we should still a lot of human judgement
      - yifanl 8y ago
        Any time a decision is made, it's up to the whims of somebody. What you're saying wouldn't make sense even if we had technical means to deterministically decide everything.
dvdgsng 8y ago
> small companies and startups are left to the whims of bunch of bureaucrats ... and they might even have to comply to other laws, too. god forbid. why can't they just make a quick buck without anyone bothering them? ...
- dwild 8y ago
  The things is, laws aren't whims. Law shouldn't be applied based on the opinion of some bureaucrats. That's how you get a tiny fine for a big multinational because "they are responsible for too many jobs" or the classical one "their lobby pay me well enough" while the tiny startup get a too big for them fine because, who cares. Can't we both agree that this fine is WAY too small? Can we both agree that this fine would be WAY too big if it was for a tiny website with a few hundred users? The idea behind GDPR is amazing, I agree with the concept. What I disagree with is the execution and that fine is the proof that it's pretty badly done.
  - deleted 8y ago
    [deleted]
  - dvdgsng 8y ago
    yes, i agree with both of your statements. :) As far as i understood (correct me if i'm wrong pls) the GDPR fines apply to each single violation and depends on the severity of the violation, so having a big range makes kind of sense, IMHO. I don't know if that applies to this case, though.

Angostura 8y ago

> Essentially, small companies and startups that break the law are left to the whims of bunch of bureaucrats. Fixed that for you. There's a way for small companies to avoid this - take your user's data security at least slightly seriously

thanosnose 8y ago
So sad to see reddit leaking into HN. > There's a way for small companies to avoid this - take your user's data security at least slightly seriously No kidding. My point wasn't about that. My point is that the bureaucrats chose not to apply the law - "Looks like the fine was almost a bit too low in this case..." AKA leaving the fines/punishment to the whims of bureaucrats. If even the bureaucrats are refusing to enforce the law correctly, it usually implies that there is something wrong with the law.
- majewsky 8y ago
  > If even the bureaucrats are refusing to enforce the law correctly The law says "up to [that much of a fine]", not "exactly [that much of a fine]".
  - thanosnose 8y ago
    AKA, "up to the whims of a bureaucrat"? My god the pro-GPDR brigade is running wild.
    - ceejayoz 8y ago
      There are very few punishments in Western democracies not subject to some level of judgement call. Until we've got AIs, questions like "was this deliberate" and "how much non-monetary harm was caused" will require a human (or group of them) to make a call.
      - kiriakasis 8y ago
        And even with the most perfect AIs we should still a lot of human judgement
    - yifanl 8y ago
      Any time a decision is made, it's up to the whims of somebody. What you're saying wouldn't make sense even if we had technical means to deterministically decide everything.

dvdgsng 8y ago

> small companies and startups are left to the whims of bunch of bureaucrats ... and they might even have to comply to other laws, too. god forbid. why can't they just make a quick buck without anyone bothering them? ...

dwild 8y ago
The things is, laws aren't whims. Law shouldn't be applied based on the opinion of some bureaucrats. That's how you get a tiny fine for a big multinational because "they are responsible for too many jobs" or the classical one "their lobby pay me well enough" while the tiny startup get a too big for them fine because, who cares. Can't we both agree that this fine is WAY too small? Can we both agree that this fine would be WAY too big if it was for a tiny website with a few hundred users? The idea behind GDPR is amazing, I agree with the concept. What I disagree with is the execution and that fine is the proof that it's pretty badly done.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
- dvdgsng 8y ago
  yes, i agree with both of your statements. :) As far as i understood (correct me if i'm wrong pls) the GDPR fines apply to each single violation and depends on the severity of the violation, so having a big range makes kind of sense, IMHO. I don't know if that applies to this case, though.