Hank Asher turned Americans’ private information into a business

That would definitely help, but I think it wouldn't be enough. Drugstores would promptly come up with some app-related trick, like "just scan this QR-code to redeem your discount", and personal info would be acquired indirectly.

Legislators started to elaborate a bill recently, addressing the case of drugstores in particular, but I suspect they will end up delivering something full of breaches, just like they did in the State of Sao Paulo.

Moreover, drugstores are on the spot currently, but there are plenty of companies doing exactly the same nowadays.

> in the Brazilians drugstores case, it's absurd, it's like, a $400 drug sold for $300

Indeed. And I've seen even more scandalous differences already. Psychiatric drugs are the champions, in my experience.

That would definitely help, but I think it wouldn't be enough. Drugstores would promptly come up with some app-related trick, like "just scan this QR-code to redeem your discount", and personal-info would be acquired indirectly.

They started to elaborate a bill recently, addressing the case of drugstores in particular, but I suspect they will eventually deliver something full of breaches, just like they did in the State of Sao Paulo.

Moreover, drugstores are on the spot currently, but there are plenty of companies doing exact the same nowadays.

>

You can just think of how complex it is from a technical perspective to implement this. Sync all those systems, databases and vendors if a user on my website deletes his data or account. And in case one of those vendors or sub vendors fail to delete (let's say their API responds with an error or I had implemented it wrong or it stopped working due to an API change). It gets hairy quite fast.

If you hire Salesforce you generally disclose to your users that you use Salesforce. But you don't tell them all of Salesforce's processors, and all of their professors, and so on down the infinite loop.

Edit: also the original comment was seeking consent, presumably affirmative. The GDPR system is a model that only provides (some but not all) notice, not affirmative consent.

End outcome is the same - peoples privacy already has a price. That price is just currently only represented by FAANG profits.

The easiest way to deal with people like this is by putting it in 'the language' they speak. While I'd love, personally, to see some direct regulation, legislation, etc. that doesn't involve turning this into yet another line 'in the books' / in the annual reports etc. of companies ... and feeds, arguably, even more into that sort of thinking ... for multiple reasons there are extensive practical issues with doing that in the US currently. It'd certainly be helpful in the longer term if we could get some people away from viewing everything through the lens of numbers - especially conflating OTHER PEOPLE with "format strings" in Excel (effectively). But, I believe in being practical along with strategic. If such metrics are needed, private-party lawsuits are needed ... if government (outside of perhaps putting some basic accounting in place &/ the justice system and current tort laws) is not an option for sorting out disputes and correcting bad behavior, particularly some forms of traditional government regulation, and the bottom-line is king ... then let's use what is available or might be put in place, ultimately speaking the 'language' necessary to push things in a more reasonable direction.

* Not uniformly distributed, for sure, but increasingly visible on average - in part, thanks MBA programs, but also, somewhat relatedly, decades of work and marketing from people who really want to turn the clock back ... wannabe robber-barons (https://youtu.be/DqgvHUg_vxY) and even those with plantation 'wetdreams'

** Incidentally, this is related to the kind of "mob rule" that outright dangerous politicians like Trump represent. Importantly, dangerous to EVERYONE, even those in the cult, though they almost certainly don't know the true extent of the danger, even remotely. In essence, without any principles / rule of law established in notions like actual justice, truth, fairness, equitable treatment, etc., any forces driving large systems involving people will tend to devolve into forms of mob rule. Whether it's markets for goods and services, the "marketplace of ideas", etc.

What is more and more absent in America, in particular, in public discourse especially, but also in certain business sectors of, in some cases, outsized importance in this entire 'picture', is the kind of principled viewpoints, ideas, thinking, etc. that have repeatedly re-formed this country at those critical moments when it might have broken / not become the exemplar that it often has been. Whether that happens this time as well remains to be seen, I think.

That's a massive topic ... all of this is ... and I am really no expert in much of this, so caveat there, but, I have enough of a sense and of the details of history and the differences in outcomes at different times and in different places to offer the commentary I am right now. More importantly, regardless of some of the background / mechanisms, the actual behaviors are clear enough in recent times / events / data. I.e., what I've written outside of these footnotes.

If they get caught it's $100 and they need to delete it. Caught with the same data its $1000.

Furthermore, if they are caught storing data in a pattern, say 100 people catch them within a year of the first, the fine retroactively becomes $1000 per incident over the time of the pattern.

With a Judge having discretion to raise fines, retroactively and inclusive of new violations, for companies that simply refuse to comply.

I feel like this could work.

In fact, I would think most companies would start designing their systems to ensure they didn't violate by accident. Which is what they are supposed to be doing, but not.

The regular line is self explanatory. Precheck is solely run by the TSA, and they politely ask the airports to set up dedicated lines for precheck. Sometimes they do, sometimes they don't. Until passengers are in the checkpoint though (i.e. beyond the id check), the TSA has fairly limited authority. The airport is ultimately responsible for getting passengers to the security checkpoint, subject to some minor conditions by the TSA. Clear pays the airport/airlines a kickback from the subscriptions to let their agents manage the queues, which includes putting their subscribers in front of the other lines. One thing they can't do is give you special perks inside the checkpoint like precheck does.

So, 3 lines because 2 different parties get revenue from one each.