DOT
sounds good
I agree it's a difficult problem and it's hard to define boundaries, but some level of competence is welcome when handling data that belongs to other people.
If you start some internet service, I expect you not to lose my data (in some lame way, s.h.), just like I expect my car mechanic not to destroy my engine.
edit: to give it context, I closed my programming website with thousands of active users that I had for almost 20 years because of GDPR, I'm not a big fan of it, but what I like even less is when complete incompetence when handling personal data results in zero consequences
All sorts of civil offences and crimes can be mistakes. While "it was an accident" might lower the penalty it doesn't negate the fact the mistake was made and people might have been hurt.
The idea that we should hold companies that profit off people's personal data blameless if they manage to "make a slip-up" with it is absurd. The only other industry where we accept those kinds of mistakes is Wall Street and we all know how well that policy has gone.
>profit off people's personal data
Have you "decided to create a business around destroying the environment" and "profit off CO2 emissions" because your office is heated in the winter? GDPR is not specific to the adtech or data brokerage industries.
It was purely a hobby affair that was a net loss, but Google ads ($10 per month) reduced the cost somewhat.
Those ads probably made it a for profit business.
I shut the thing down before GDPR, but if I hadn’t it surely would have been an excellent reason to do so.
Those are the kind of websites that you lose.
I consider that a loss.
Pure FUD.
EDIT: Downvotes don't change reality. The OP is spreading FUD.
Edit: unless the website was actually abusing users privacy in which case I'm glad it is gone.
https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=d8d0c69a-620e...