5 ms·

Imagine if we lived in a society where you were given a small fine for the first time you commit murder and then life imprisonment for the second offence. This

Imagine if we lived in a society where you were given a small fine for the first time you commit murder and then life imprisonment for the second offence. This may lead people to believe that murder is a serious but forgivable offence when it is not. That’s my first argument: small fines play down the seriousness of the “crime”. My second argument is the efficiency of using capitalism to fight capitalism. Take money from companies who make mistakes with personal information. Be that out of ignorance, malice or bad luck. Why does it need to be fair and just - make money from it. Make it a risk to capture personal information in the first place. If those companies go out of business then so be it. Others will take their place. It’s not impossible to do business without storing personal information, there is just not enough incentive to bother.

jacquesm 6y ago
(1) this isn't murder, so that's a false equivalent. Murder is in a different book of law than privacy laws. (2) small fines do not play down the seriousness of the transgression (which is the word I think you should be using for instances like this). They merely indicate that you should clean up your act assuming no real harm has been done. In some cases the regulators have immediately resorted to fines, and quite large ones as well if they felt that the case warranted it. They do have that option. But putting companies out of business was never the goal, contrary to what a lot of alarmist people were screaming when the law went into force. Also, over time as more and more companies have been fined I would expect that the initial fines will go up because claiming ignorance really isn't an option any more. Some comments in this thread are particularly worrisome in that light, it appears that some people still don't get it and they are in positions where they really should know better. Turning data into a liability rather than an asset is the long term outcome. This will take time, and when it happens I'll be that much happier. Every company will have to seriously weigh the price of holding on to some datum vs the price of losing it.
- davidhyde 6y ago
  You’ve made some good points there. I guess it’s a balancing act and if the regulators go too far too quickly then we may never get to that long term goal.
  - jacquesm 6y ago
    Exactly. I keep a close watch on the fines via the enforcement tracker. I think some of them are too strict, some too lenient but overall the picture is actually quite ok.
maxsilver 6y ago
> Imagine if we lived in a society where you were given a small fine for the first time you commit (an offense) and then (a harsher punishment) for the second offence. We do live in that society. For example, the first few time you get caught speeding, you get a warning or a ticket with a fine. Keep getting caught speeding, and you lose your license and/or go to jail.

jacquesm 6y ago

(1) this isn't murder, so that's a false equivalent. Murder is in a different book of law than privacy laws. (2) small fines do not play down the seriousness of the transgression (which is the word I think you should be using for instances like this). They merely indicate that you should clean up your act assuming no real harm has been done. In some cases the regulators have immediately resorted to fines, and quite large ones as well if they felt that the case warranted it. They do have that option. But putting companies out of business was never the goal, contrary to what a lot of alarmist people were screaming when the law went into force. Also, over time as more and more companies have been fined I would expect that the initial fines will go up because claiming ignorance really isn't an option any more. Some comments in this thread are particularly worrisome in that light, it appears that some people still don't get it and they are in positions where they really should know better. Turning data into a liability rather than an asset is the long term outcome. This will take time, and when it happens I'll be that much happier. Every company will have to seriously weigh the price of holding on to some datum vs the price of losing it.

davidhyde 6y ago
You’ve made some good points there. I guess it’s a balancing act and if the regulators go too far too quickly then we may never get to that long term goal.
- jacquesm 6y ago
  Exactly. I keep a close watch on the fines via the enforcement tracker. I think some of them are too strict, some too lenient but overall the picture is actually quite ok.

maxsilver 6y ago

> Imagine if we lived in a society where you were given a small fine for the first time you commit (an offense) and then (a harsher punishment) for the second offence. We do live in that society. For example, the first few time you get caught speeding, you get a warning or a ticket with a fine. Keep getting caught speeding, and you lose your license and/or go to jail.