> This brings me to a piece of legislation I have been very critical of for quite some time: GDPR. The intent of the legislation is certainly admirable — protect consumer privacy —although (and this may be the American in me speaking) I am perhaps a bit skeptical about just how much most consumers care relative to elites in the media.
Amen. The way Google and FB are using data just doesn't bother the masses the way it bothers the media and the narrative they've built (or the way it bothers us). There are many steps that can be taken, some incremental, towards the curbing of these practices. But we, as technologists, should always decry heavy-handed government regulation of the internet, especially as an early step. The intent does not matter.
If legislation doesn't work, don't make more or make it larger assuming it was the scope that was the problem. Take a step back and recognize alternatives including enforcing existing statues, promoting alternatives, educating citizenry, more targeted and narrowly scoped legislation, etc.
Amen. The way Google and FB are using data just doesn't bother the masses the way it bothers the media and the narrative they've built (or the way it bothers us). There are many steps that can be taken, some incremental, towards the curbing of these practices. But we, as technologists, should always decry heavy-handed government regulation of the internet, especially as an early step. The intent does not matter.
If legislation doesn't work, don't make more or make it larger assuming it was the scope that was the problem. Take a step back and recognize alternatives including enforcing existing statues, promoting alternatives, educating citizenry, more targeted and narrowly scoped legislation, etc.