2 ms·

It applies to companies that collect data about EU citizens. It isn't a cure-all but it is a whole lot better than what we had before and what exists in most o

It applies to companies that collect data about EU citizens. It isn't a cure-all but it is a whole lot better than what we had before and what exists in most other parts of the world.

jtbayly 6y ago
Thankfully you’re still wrong. It doesn’t apply to businesses that the EU has no jurisdiction over, just as Chinese laws against criticizing China do not apply to companies it has no jurisdiction over. EU residents are, of course, free to not do business with those they don’t want to. Likewise, businesses are free to comply or not, just as companies can choose to comply when China says to stop reporting on their human rights violations.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  > It doesn’t apply to businesses that the EU has no jurisdiction over It applies, though indeed it doesn't matter in the immediate future because the EU won't be able to collect on it. However, I would expect it to prevent that company from ever being able to open a EU-based subsidiary in the future, so it's still a good deterrent (that is, if the GDPR was actually enforced). In practice though, the worst offenders which the GDPR is supposed to protect us against (though again the enforcement of it leaves much to be desired) have big EU presences so it's not a problem. > EU residents are, of course, free to not do business with those they don’t want to The problem is that companies that the GDPR applies to seem very determined to be doing "business" with EU residents even without their knowledge or agreement. This "business" is of course about collecting, reselling or using their personal information in nefarious ways. Indeed, if the solution was as simple as "don't do business with these companies" we would've never had the GDPR because there wasn't a need for it.

2 ms·

It applies to companies that collect data about EU citizens. It isn't a cure-all but it is a whole lot better than what we had before and what exists in most o

by SahAssar 6y ago

It applies to companies that collect data about EU citizens. It isn't a cure-all but it is a whole lot better than what we had before and what exists in most other parts of the world.

jtbayly 6y ago
Thankfully you’re still wrong. It doesn’t apply to businesses that the EU has no jurisdiction over, just as Chinese laws against criticizing China do not apply to companies it has no jurisdiction over. EU residents are, of course, free to not do business with those they don’t want to. Likewise, businesses are free to comply or not, just as companies can choose to comply when China says to stop reporting on their human rights violations.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- Nextgrid 6y ago
  > It doesn’t apply to businesses that the EU has no jurisdiction over It applies, though indeed it doesn't matter in the immediate future because the EU won't be able to collect on it. However, I would expect it to prevent that company from ever being able to open a EU-based subsidiary in the future, so it's still a good deterrent (that is, if the GDPR was actually enforced). In practice though, the worst offenders which the GDPR is supposed to protect us against (though again the enforcement of it leaves much to be desired) have big EU presences so it's not a problem. > EU residents are, of course, free to not do business with those they don’t want to The problem is that companies that the GDPR applies to seem very determined to be doing "business" with EU residents even without their knowledge or agreement. This "business" is of course about collecting, reselling or using their personal information in nefarious ways. Indeed, if the solution was as simple as "don't do business with these companies" we would've never had the GDPR because there wasn't a need for it.