wooter

as an american, no thank you. compelled speech is not okay

and its absurd, rejected, and overturned. if i use your laptop, am i you?

interesting that hardly any eu governments respect that right

so while its possible, Tesla is making changes that bring accident rates down. Everyone here is acting like its certain with absolutely no scientific evidence. Clearly by significantly more than they go up. Its stupid to come down on them like they're murdering people. That IS how you stop all progress.

Furthermore, no one is forcing anyone to buy Teslas. People should be free to do as they choose. I have no doubt, for example, that a corvette, lambo, m3, or convertible all increase certain risks for their drivers by far more than autopilot - which probably decreases their risks.

the idiocy of this law really grinds my gears.

calling it video games and memes is extremely disingenuous. it replaces icons

The NHTSA found a 40% crash rate reduction from Tesla's autopilot. I'd say thats what its good for.

The NHTSA found a 40% crash rate reduction from Tesla's autopilot. So how about you tell all the people who lives have been saved that you wish they hadn't been because you're an emotional reactionary

spoken like someone who's never started a company.

> "What were the lawyers doing all that time before then?"

what lawyers? do you realize that compliance, proving compliance, and implementing mandated features are completely separate tasks with cumulative costs? even if you aren't doing anything with the data?

> Any business trading internationally has to have a care over the regulatory environment of the target country. Why is internet trading any different?

bad, stifling, preemptive regulation is bad regulation in any industry. why is internet trading any different?

> What were the lawyers doing all that time before then? IT techs here have been training for GDPR for the four years since the law was first designed.

wow, and people claim this won't just destroy totally innocent startups.

this is totally illogical and false with a basic understanding of economics. by definition the new startup is DOA without capital for compliance/proof of compliance/mandated features whereas the bigger business has capital.

not to mention that, historically and intrinsically, visiting a site or using someones application is a voluntary activity. no one is forcing the user to do anything and the user shouldn't be able to force the developers to do anything.

many people disagree with preemptive, guilty until proven innocent regulation. many people also disagree with taxation in-so-far as they are not proportionate usage fees. And yes, certain regulations are definitely harmful. "But other regulations exist" isn't a valid excuse for any and all ever-increasing regulation.

> I think the cost of not having this law is much higher.

There is no way you could know this and every indication to the contrary. Many EU countries are struggling with jobs and claiming to want a tech sector. This just made it much less likely.

> There will be new opportunities for startups,

The barrier to entry was raised. That means that startups which cannot afford proof of compliance will not exist - whether or not they meet your subjective definition of "detrimental to society."

the inability of gdpr advocates to assess or even acknowledge the true cost and negative consequences of this law is extremely unsettling. everything from "its completely easy to implement [even-though i'm not even referring to any particular business model]" to "it requires development of non-product related features but won't hurt startups" to "proving compliance isn't a burdensome cost to completely innocent companies" to "if you can't do it, you shouldn't exist anyways [even-though no one is forcing anyone to use anything]" to "it is vague to give our benevolent regulators ability to enforce it selectively [and somehow always perfectly]"

ironically, this very blogger made all the same arguments here:

https://jacquesmattheij.com/gdpr-hysteria

his response to his current concern is: "then automate it" as if this is trivial. and "my blog is compliant" as if this means anything for even the most basic business model.

illegal? what a joke. if you don't want to take that risk, don't buy one.

i'm sure cumulative energy use across all regulable devices is not insignificant. thats how government policy works.

yes. if you want that, you can only buy from a company that does it. if enough people agree, they'll all do it or fail. i don't abide by the 'its such a good idea, everyone must be forced to do it' mentality

no they didn't. it was self-reported abuses and no consequences.

great way to just have companies add an annoying, always on LED, that wastes energy to avoid lawsuits. how about we let the market regulate, as it is doing currently. did amazon respond faster than the government has on surveillance? yes. should companies that don't abuse their power/neglect their software be punished for all eternity because of amazon's actions? i think not.

Snowden proved this was false.

all things that exist without the government and which vary wildly amongst professions. i work far more than 40 hours and don't take most weekends - as I am entitled to.

So it should be able to screw people not holding them? Or those who cant get a $1 Million dollar loan or pay 3k to drive a car? Car leases are easy at $150.

I've never found "everybody's doing it" to be compelling.

Guaranteeing repairability costs money. As does understanding/compliance with the law, the paper work, the legalities if someone tries to sue, ... i could go on and on

Big companies can afford it, start ups can’t. The alternative for an incumbent is less profit and a higher barrier to entry for ne competitors. The alternative for the start up is not existing

his fake offense on behalf of others is a faux pas. its a common term. we can't use "shit hole" because some people recently decided that was the case?

as a minority immigrant from a shithole country, i find this opinion condescending and racist. please use whatever adjective you would use for any other race - i don't need my sensitive minority ears protected by an up-to-the-minute adjective whitelist, thanks.

where in the US can't you find healthy food "outside"?

I dont see that connection at all.

In fact, it is the 'benevolent' government that has abused surveillance, tried to corruptly enable large companies to censor the internet under the guise of 'anti-piracy' (SOPA), and pushed Aaron to suicide through prosecutorial overreach which Net Neutrality proponents want to grant more control over the ISPs over fear-mongering (like piracy) of prices/throttling. (despite the obvious failures of government-enabled regional monopolies)

So no preemptive regulation before 2015. When the entire internet was created.