This is an oft repeated argument that makes no sense. The point of privacy legislation is not to increase competition. The point is to increase privacy. The government has other legislative tools to increase competition should it wish to do so.
This is an oft repeated argument that makes no sense. The point of privacy legislation is not to increase competition. The point is to increase privacy. The government has other legislative tools to increase competition should it wish to do so.
> With sadness, StreetLend was shut down in April 2018, after five years of operation.
> Unfortunately the European Union's new GDPR (General Data Protection Regulation), introduced on 25th May 2018, creates uncertainty and risk that are impossible to justify for small non-profit websites.
It looks more like someone who does not like the GDPR (because it affects them in some other way, because they are mislead, out of principle or who knows what reason) who then chose to sacrifice their pet project to make a statement.
It's so nonsensical that occasionally I wonder if this is an argument made primarily by the incumbents themselves in order to maintain the status quo.
There is no point without a person to have one. This is your point. It's absolutely impossible to generalize it to everyone who works to pass "privacy" legislation, and simply incorrect. Sometimes you try to pass privacy legislation to reduce privacy. Sometimes you try to pass privacy legislation because you have a product that would sell more if it passed. And yes, sometimes you try to pass privacy legislation because it adds so much red tape that you need a full time employee, a team, or a department to comply with it, and you know potential challengers can't afford that yet.