relics443

Great story and all, but this piece is obviously written as an attack on Trump for things he didn't do, and failures that never happened to him.

When will the media get that this doesn't work?

So now the EU is in charge of how I decide to build my app, and is trying to dictate what suppliers I can use?

What if I decide that crash reporting is an essential service (it is), and the EU's lawyers decide that it's not? Who is going to pay my legal fees, and potential fine? I should be on the hook because some schmuck uses a service that I provide for free (which essentially means I'm paying for it with my time), and is upset that I may not be handling his data in the way that the EU says I should be? The sane solution would be to allow me to tell this individual that he cannot use the app if he doesn't consent. But here comes the EU telling me that I must allow him to use the app.

So the rest of the world should get annoyed with the opening dialog, so that the EU doesn't have to get blocked? Sounds like this could be solved by a proper solution, which the GDPR is not.

I'm beginning to highly doubt that anyone defending the GDPR has ever had any responsibilities that included:

1. Running a tech company

2. Funnels, conversions, and retentions

3. Writing software

Either that or they just want to watch the world burn.

Did you read any further? If I can't prevent them from using the app, then I have to solve an impossible problem. Namely providing a fallback for core services that the app is built on.

Don't worry. The GDPR does a bang up job of devaluing itself.

Yes. Besides for the administration costs incurred (which is probably the real killer), the list of death points are:

1. Adding a dialog as the first step in an onboarding funnel that's already difficult to get users through

2. Handling non-consent. WTF! So if the user doesn't give consent to something that 99% of the population doesn't understand, I'm not allowed to prevent them from using the app. And so my engineering team needs to waste critical hours figuring out things like how to deal with crashes, or maybe how in the fuck we're supposed to fallback to not using services that we're built on (e.g. Firebase)!

3. Dealing with the fallout of #1 in the form of bad reviews that are the kiss of death to startups

Unfortunately those competitors will crash and burn when their users get pissed off at the opening dialog.

Oh the law. Good one.

The same law that fined me $1,800 because a posted notice fell off my door in a blizzard? The same law that allowed the judge to uphold the fine by saying "I don't believe you". Bureaucracy sucks, and the second it gets its tentacles on you, no amount of cheek clenching is gonna delay the inevitable.

I think you mean "can't see a reason not to honestly, ONLY if it's valid". And even that's morally ambiguous.

Really? Most of what I've seen from outside the industry is akin to "GET THIS ING DIALOG OFF MY SCREEN I HATE IT WHEN THE FIRST THING AN APP DOES IS SHOW A ING POINTLESS DIALOG WHEN I JUST WANT TO USE THE APP"

I've heard conflicting reports about that as well.

I don't see what leaking personal information has to do with collecting crash data, or using Google's infrastructure to store my data. Why should I have to be on the hook for what is most definitely much safer than trying to safeguard the data myself?

Like I said, all it will accomplish is discouraging projects like mine that aim to provide utility to some people. One of my released hobby apps is no great commercial success (I don't show ads or collect revenue), but it's one of the top rated apps in its category on the Play Store, and I have about 20k DAU.

If the GDPR ever came after me for it, I'd just take the app down. Bam, 20k people a day affected because of over regulation.

Also, I wouldn't equate personalized ads with the life and death regulations involved in the auto industry.

My point is, I have no clue what's collecting data in an improper way, and I'm not going to hire a lawyer for a hobby app.

The amount of conflicting information about whether I do or don't need consent based on what services I use is just stupid. And I wouldn't even be showing ads.

Part of the apps function is related to location, do I need consent? Maybe.

It will use Firebase, do I need consent? Maybe.

It will collect crash data so I can debug the stupid thing, do I need consent? Maybe.

Etc...

I'm still struggling with the fact that the EU can compel me to add what will be a funnel shattering dialog to my onboarding.

I've shelved a bunch of side projects that I was excited to work on because I have no interest in dealing with any of this ambiguous law. Implementing it would most likely cause a large percentage of users to uninstall my app, because who wants to be greeted with a scary sounding dialog as their first experience in an app. I know many folks here are privacy oriented, but unless this tiny slice of the population is willing to fund my app, I have 0 interest in pandering to them vs the majority of users that would get scared away by it.

I know that there's an almost 0% chance of any repercussion for not being compliant in a tiny app that'll probably never get anywhere, but I'm just so sickened by this whole thing that I don't want to deal with any of it.