5 ms·

Providing the service assumes staying in business, no?

by cameronbrown 6y ago

p_l 6y ago
No, there's no protection for failed business models, as there should not be.
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  The business model of Google isn't a failed business model. What the GDPR does do, quite successfully, is build a moat around Google so wide and deep as to minimize competition with them, because they're one of the few firms that can both (a) afford the engineers with the technical expertise to comply with the law while accomplishing their goals and (b) afford the lawyers to address the issue when they fail at the former.
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    > afford the engineers with the technical expertise to comply with the law while accomplishing their goals Google is in breach of the GDPR as it stands, so no. > afford the lawyers to address the issue when they fail at the former Potentially, though again a clear-cut breach like theirs should result in a fine regardless of how much money they throw at the problem. As far as building a moat, I'm not sure. Whether it's Google or a one-man shop, neither can accurately track users without being in breach. There is no moat that I can see, you either break the law or you don't.
    - shadowgovt 6y ago
      > Google is in breach of the GDPR as it stands, so no. I don't believe that is true. What is your source? They were fined in Jan 2019, but are they still out of compliance? If yes, why are they not being continuously fined? > you either break the law or you don't. That's the result on the other side of a trial, sure. Which is why good lawyers are so important.
      - Nextgrid 6y ago
        > They were fined in Jan 2019, but are they still out of compliance? They were fined on one specific thing and they maybe fixed it (or silently replaced with an equivalent, non-compliant thing once they went out of the spotlight), however they are plenty of other things they do that are in breach and those are not being investigated nor fined which is why we're discussing the lack of enforcement. > Which is why good lawyers are so important. True, but a good law should be one that you can't lawyer your way out of and so far the GDPR outcome of that is inconclusive given there is barely any enforcement at all.
  - p_l 6y ago
    They are a giant and those can be hard to topple in one go, but the fact that a giant can continue a failed business model for a longer time does not make it a not failed model. Hell, at least around 2017, there were voices from Google that they considered ads to be unsustainable long term and sought to diversificate income streams. The fun thing is, GDPR didn't actually introduce much change in law. It just gave, for the first time in history, existing laws a real set of teeth, even if they are still baby teeth. So yeah, all that data companies had been vacuuming for no sensible purpose? It was always illegal
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Mirioron 6y ago
  A business model that fails because you explicitly make them illegal isn't exactly a failed business model. The lawmakers made them fail and they either knew it was going to happen or were incompetent.
  - growse 6y ago
    > A business model that fails because you explicitly make them illegal isn't exactly a failed business model. It literally is, by definition. Any business success has to happen within the legal context it exists in. > The lawmakers made them fail and they either knew it was going to happen or were incompetent. I could reword this as "the elected representatives of the people decided that certain business models were undesirable and anti-consumer, so legislated against them".
    - Mirioron 6y ago
      >It literally is, by definition. Any business success has to happen within the legal context it exists in. Yes, and they had business success until the rules were changed from under them. >I could reword this as "the elected representatives of the people decided that certain business models were undesirable and anti-consumer, so legislated against them". And I could reword this as "lobbying groups have bought our politicians and use them to enact laws to put our competitors out of business". I'd say my rewording is closer to reality, because of course the two biggest ad networks increased in size while the smaller ones decreased as a result of this regulation.
  - Fargren 6y ago
    A goal of the GDPR was to make these business models illegal, because they are considered bad. It has not been successfull at this, mostly due to lack of enforcement.
    - Mirioron 6y ago
      Or maybe that's what the voters are told. Why do so many people suddenly believe politicians? Do you think European politicians don't constantly lie through their teeth?
Dylan16807 6y ago
Not for this regulation. Business considerations do not matter, only technical ones.
- shadowgovt 6y ago
  The true hallmark of an ill-conceived law.
  - Dylan16807 6y ago
    Letting companies opt-out of a regulation purely because it hurts their business model sounds much more ill-conceived to me.
    - shadowgovt 6y ago
      Good law doesn't "let companies opt-out;" it is crafted with consideration for what is already happening and the consequences of the law. it doesn't appear, 2 years in, GDPR passes that test. If the goal was to minimize "privacy violation" by FB and Google, it's failing. FB and Google are stronger than ever, but their competitors are starved out of the market trying to comply with an onerous suite of policies. It's such a ladder-pulling set of laws it's surprising Google and Facebook didn't craft it.
      - Dylan16807 6y ago
        Did we read the same article? Most fines are tiny. It hasn't fixed everything (yet) but that doesn't mean it's hurting competition. > Good law doesn't "let companies opt-out;" it is crafted with consideration for what is already happening and the consequences of the law. And sometimes the outcome of that consideration is "stop doing that".
  - Nextgrid 6y ago
    In this case you could say anti-drug-trafficking laws are ill-conceived because they go against the cartels' business models.
edynoid 6y ago
You'd have a hard time arguing that breaking GDPR is the only way to stay in business. There are enough compliant news websites to undermine that argument.

Providing the service assumes staying in business, no?

p_l 6y ago

No, there's no protection for failed business models, as there should not be.

shadowgovt 6y ago
The business model of Google isn't a failed business model. What the GDPR does do, quite successfully, is build a moat around Google so wide and deep as to minimize competition with them, because they're one of the few firms that can both (a) afford the engineers with the technical expertise to comply with the law while accomplishing their goals and (b) afford the lawyers to address the issue when they fail at the former.
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  > afford the engineers with the technical expertise to comply with the law while accomplishing their goals Google is in breach of the GDPR as it stands, so no. > afford the lawyers to address the issue when they fail at the former Potentially, though again a clear-cut breach like theirs should result in a fine regardless of how much money they throw at the problem. As far as building a moat, I'm not sure. Whether it's Google or a one-man shop, neither can accurately track users without being in breach. There is no moat that I can see, you either break the law or you don't.
  - shadowgovt 6y ago
    > Google is in breach of the GDPR as it stands, so no. I don't believe that is true. What is your source? They were fined in Jan 2019, but are they still out of compliance? If yes, why are they not being continuously fined? > you either break the law or you don't. That's the result on the other side of a trial, sure. Which is why good lawyers are so important.
    - Nextgrid 6y ago
      > They were fined in Jan 2019, but are they still out of compliance? They were fined on one specific thing and they maybe fixed it (or silently replaced with an equivalent, non-compliant thing once they went out of the spotlight), however they are plenty of other things they do that are in breach and those are not being investigated nor fined which is why we're discussing the lack of enforcement. > Which is why good lawyers are so important. True, but a good law should be one that you can't lawyer your way out of and so far the GDPR outcome of that is inconclusive given there is barely any enforcement at all.
- p_l 6y ago
  They are a giant and those can be hard to topple in one go, but the fact that a giant can continue a failed business model for a longer time does not make it a not failed model. Hell, at least around 2017, there were voices from Google that they considered ads to be unsustainable long term and sought to diversificate income streams. The fun thing is, GDPR didn't actually introduce much change in law. It just gave, for the first time in history, existing laws a real set of teeth, even if they are still baby teeth. So yeah, all that data companies had been vacuuming for no sensible purpose? It was always illegal
deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
Mirioron 6y ago
A business model that fails because you explicitly make them illegal isn't exactly a failed business model. The lawmakers made them fail and they either knew it was going to happen or were incompetent.
- growse 6y ago
  > A business model that fails because you explicitly make them illegal isn't exactly a failed business model. It literally is, by definition. Any business success has to happen within the legal context it exists in. > The lawmakers made them fail and they either knew it was going to happen or were incompetent. I could reword this as "the elected representatives of the people decided that certain business models were undesirable and anti-consumer, so legislated against them".
  - Mirioron 6y ago
    >It literally is, by definition. Any business success has to happen within the legal context it exists in. Yes, and they had business success until the rules were changed from under them. >I could reword this as "the elected representatives of the people decided that certain business models were undesirable and anti-consumer, so legislated against them". And I could reword this as "lobbying groups have bought our politicians and use them to enact laws to put our competitors out of business". I'd say my rewording is closer to reality, because of course the two biggest ad networks increased in size while the smaller ones decreased as a result of this regulation.
- Fargren 6y ago
  A goal of the GDPR was to make these business models illegal, because they are considered bad. It has not been successfull at this, mostly due to lack of enforcement.
  - Mirioron 6y ago
    Or maybe that's what the voters are told. Why do so many people suddenly believe politicians? Do you think European politicians don't constantly lie through their teeth?

Dylan16807 6y ago

Not for this regulation. Business considerations do not matter, only technical ones.

shadowgovt 6y ago
The true hallmark of an ill-conceived law.
- Dylan16807 6y ago
  Letting companies opt-out of a regulation purely because it hurts their business model sounds much more ill-conceived to me.
  - shadowgovt 6y ago
    Good law doesn't "let companies opt-out;" it is crafted with consideration for what is already happening and the consequences of the law. it doesn't appear, 2 years in, GDPR passes that test. If the goal was to minimize "privacy violation" by FB and Google, it's failing. FB and Google are stronger than ever, but their competitors are starved out of the market trying to comply with an onerous suite of policies. It's such a ladder-pulling set of laws it's surprising Google and Facebook didn't craft it.
    - Dylan16807 6y ago
      Did we read the same article? Most fines are tiny. It hasn't fixed everything (yet) but that doesn't mean it's hurting competition. > Good law doesn't "let companies opt-out;" it is crafted with consideration for what is already happening and the consequences of the law. And sometimes the outcome of that consideration is "stop doing that".
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  In this case you could say anti-drug-trafficking laws are ill-conceived because they go against the cartels' business models.

edynoid 6y ago

You'd have a hard time arguing that breaking GDPR is the only way to stay in business. There are enough compliant news websites to undermine that argument.