3 ms·
So I did quick excel math - I took just the US companies from top 100, sumed them and then I summed everything else (the entire list, not just top 100) - includ
by rafaelmn 1y ago
So I did quick excel math - I took just the US companies from top 100, sumed them and then I summed everything else (the entire list, not just top 100) - including tiktok - and the ratio is almost 3 to one against US companies in total.
In fact Meta alone is fined more than everyone else combined.
What exactly am I missing ?
- oblio 1y agoThe fact that the EU just doesn't have big companies in the fields that are more likely to be abusive with customer data. It's a bit like the sweatshop argument. If your company wins out by using sweatshops, yeah, you're going to end up with the billion dollar argument. But if a certain market doesn't want stuff produced by sweatshops, and they decide to dis-incentivize it by tariffing it, that: a) makes sense from their point of view b) is moral from a global perspective Similar approach here.
- rafaelmn 1y agoThats all a matter of perspective, not something I am willing to argue. EU has a history of making protectionist legislation under the guise of protecting its members, eg. the whole GMO story, and I can see how someone can make an argument here. If it is valid or not is up to you I guess. But saying that the fines are mostly towards EU members when over 2/3 is fined towards US companies is misrepresenting the data and the opposing viewpoint.
- deleted 1y ago[deleted]
- oblio 1y agoFixing a typo: * you're going end up with the billion dollar company