3 ms·
Does it actually confuse you or is that a rhetorical question? On the one have you have global manufacturers being required to switch from one well established
by comte7092 4y ago
Does it actually confuse you or is that a rhetorical question?
On the one have you have global manufacturers being required to switch from one well established standard to another, it’s a requirement that barely touches on their resources as a firm and has more to do with their business strategy.
Contrast that with organizations that are likely well meaning but barely have the technical competence to put up and maintain a website. What they are currently doing is at the limit of their technical capacity.
The two situations couldn’t be more different.
- dereg 4y agoDo you see how many qualifiers you added to this? What if it significantly touches on their resources as a firm? What if the company is “global” but revenue is primarily domestic? It’s always easy to carve these lines in the sand ex post facto. Good legislation lays out a set on consistent principles and enforcements, ex ante.
- comte7092 4y agoHacker news commenters are not legislators, it is therefore entirely reasonable for commenters to draw those lines however they see fit for the purposes of discussion. Further, it is drawing lines on the basis of number of employees/operating revenue/etc (the use of the word “global” in this case is clearly a colloquial reference to a very large firm along these metrics), is already a very common and well understood basis for drawing such lines, so such and insinuation on your part that this is some ex post facto finger pointing is without serious grounding.
- lupire 4y agoAnd bad legistlation gets exploited by scummy lawyers to hurt everyone except themselves, which is the topic of this thread.