4 ms·
I think simplifying the law for companies smaller than the 500 person cutt-off makes sense. The Brussels effect is strong. I was just in a company of approximat
by djha-skin 2y ago
I think simplifying the law for companies smaller than the 500 person cutt-off makes sense. The Brussels effect is strong. I was just in a company of approximately ~150 people in America and a significant portion of our time went to GDPR/California law takedown requests. User data was everywhere, it was a nightmare. No one thinks of this stuff when everyone is still in sink or swim mode. We got it done though.
Maybe it's an argument for the other side though as well. The architecture of the system was designed to track people as much as possible so we could do A/B, app design, and marketing more effectively. It felt like it was the company's life blood.
I would say the law should at least make people get their architecture right when small so that when they're big it's not impossible to comply later.
One last thought: our company was small in head count but is getting much bigger right now in revenue. I've heard of small head count, billion dollar companies. What of them?
- xmodem 2y agoI spent four years working at a European fintech that serviced millions of end-users, and we had a self-service GDPR portal for users to export or request deletion of the data we had on them. (In some cases we were required to hold onto certain data due to other laws). Any feature that stored new user data had to get integrated into the tool, and then signed off from legal and the team that maintained the tool. It got very little usage - maybe a few hundred to a thousand requests per year IIRC. I shudder to think what you could have been doing that would attract that volume of requests. Was it Clearview AI?