4 ms·

Isn't this the argument free-marketers have always made? The people who said GDPR would stifle competition? It will be a long time before the outcome of these c

Isn't this the argument free-marketers have always made? The people who said GDPR would stifle competition? It will be a long time before the outcome of these choices are obvious.

tick_tock_tick 7y ago
I'll have to go digging but there already was a good article that made it to the front page here about how much GDPR has helped google. It had some great numbers and graphs showing a sizable increase to googles marketshare once they were the first ones to be "GDPR compliant".
- the_mitsuhiko 7y ago
  Considering how only large tech companies have been fined noticeably so far I doubt that's the case.
  - cpwright 7y ago
    Both things can be true: only large companies have been fined, but the cost of compliance means that small companies exit the market or never enter. Many companies will attempt to follow the rules, even if they think that the probability of getting fined is low.
d1zzy 7y ago
And they wouldn't be wrong about that. Note that the 2 main arguments and counter arguments: it helps protect people's information vs it increases the barrier of entry are NOT exclusive. Both can be valid at the same time and I believe that in many regulations they are both valid. That's how life works, a chain of compromises.
- jklinger410 7y ago
  What are some examples of GDPR increasing barriers to entry?
  - kev009 7y ago
    Trivial example but the nekochan community for SGI retrocomputing shut down because of it. It's particularly hard for small business or unprofitable things done for fun/sport/public benefit.
    - scrollaway 7y ago
      I've seen many people shut down their side projects citing gdpr. Without fail it's always people who haven't really researched the impact gdpr has on them and they didn't really want to keep the project going anyways so it's more of an excuse to shut it down without facing backlash.
      - kev009 7y ago
        It seems like you are contorting the blame to "well you should just do more work!" Bureaucratic regulations have costs in implementation, enforcement and non-compliance. Those costs are naturally easy for corporations to absorb because they can hire people to do it full time or whatever the case may be. Maybe several hours or $1000 for a lawyer or whatever to review some regulation are a bridge too far for someone already devoting time and dealing with whatever negatives the side project is coupled with like less free time, negative users/customers/competition, and other opportunity cost. So yes, taking on new and unknown (to the creator) legal liability from some regulation is a great reason to shut down a side project.
        ryandrake 7y ago
        If you’re a hobby project or small business that’s already not collecting customers’ personal information, then what hard work do you have to do to comply with GDPR?
        kev009 7y ago
        Huh? I think you're lost.
        7y ago
ajross 7y ago
The GDPR is intended to protect user privacy, not "competition". Everything has side effects, but if a monoculture of online services is the price, my guess is the drafters of that law (which I'm not a huge fan of, FWIW) would be OK with that. This is the tech industry, we're always just a few decades away from everything being disrupted anyway.
kllrnohj 7y ago
There's other new EU regulations than just GDPR. The recent copyright ones do nothing for users but severally cripples startup competitors to YouTube, as an example.

Isn't this the argument free-marketers have always made? The people who said GDPR would stifle competition? It will be a long time before the outcome of these choices are obvious.

tick_tock_tick 7y ago

I'll have to go digging but there already was a good article that made it to the front page here about how much GDPR has helped google. It had some great numbers and graphs showing a sizable increase to googles marketshare once they were the first ones to be "GDPR compliant".

the_mitsuhiko 7y ago
Considering how only large tech companies have been fined noticeably so far I doubt that's the case.
- cpwright 7y ago
  Both things can be true: only large companies have been fined, but the cost of compliance means that small companies exit the market or never enter. Many companies will attempt to follow the rules, even if they think that the probability of getting fined is low.

d1zzy 7y ago

And they wouldn't be wrong about that. Note that the 2 main arguments and counter arguments: it helps protect people's information vs it increases the barrier of entry are NOT exclusive. Both can be valid at the same time and I believe that in many regulations they are both valid. That's how life works, a chain of compromises.

jklinger410 7y ago
What are some examples of GDPR increasing barriers to entry?
- kev009 7y ago
  Trivial example but the nekochan community for SGI retrocomputing shut down because of it. It's particularly hard for small business or unprofitable things done for fun/sport/public benefit.
  - scrollaway 7y ago
    I've seen many people shut down their side projects citing gdpr. Without fail it's always people who haven't really researched the impact gdpr has on them and they didn't really want to keep the project going anyways so it's more of an excuse to shut it down without facing backlash.
    - kev009 7y ago
      It seems like you are contorting the blame to "well you should just do more work!" Bureaucratic regulations have costs in implementation, enforcement and non-compliance. Those costs are naturally easy for corporations to absorb because they can hire people to do it full time or whatever the case may be. Maybe several hours or $1000 for a lawyer or whatever to review some regulation are a bridge too far for someone already devoting time and dealing with whatever negatives the side project is coupled with like less free time, negative users/customers/competition, and other opportunity cost. So yes, taking on new and unknown (to the creator) legal liability from some regulation is a great reason to shut down a side project.
      - ryandrake 7y ago
        If you’re a hobby project or small business that’s already not collecting customers’ personal information, then what hard work do you have to do to comply with GDPR?
        kev009 7y ago
        Huh? I think you're lost.
        7y ago

ajross 7y ago

The GDPR is intended to protect user privacy, not "competition". Everything has side effects, but if a monoculture of online services is the price, my guess is the drafters of that law (which I'm not a huge fan of, FWIW) would be OK with that. This is the tech industry, we're always just a few decades away from everything being disrupted anyway.

kllrnohj 7y ago

There's other new EU regulations than just GDPR. The recent copyright ones do nothing for users but severally cripples startup competitors to YouTube, as an example.