Gregory's Server@rysiek yes, i see it the same way from a moral pov. that's why i wanted to pronounce that i see value in regulations. for your second point: yes it is true that a different market with mostly local concerns promotes companies adapted to it. while lidl is a good example for this, it's revenue is a whole order of magnitude lower than that of more international companies like aws, azure and gcp. seeing google's relatively recent experiments like FLoC, i don't see them lagging behind plausible 馃У
|
4 comments
 @rysiek analytics and matomo. their push towards removing the user agent from the browser. FLoC, etc are all indicative of them being able to identify people and devices without it. coming back to differences in the US and EU: i do see that capital investments related to technology is also off a rough order of magnitude. this also shifts other resources (e.g. talent) towards the US. i don't see companies like the two mentioned above to be competetive in data analysis internationally  @feliks but we're not talking about absolute competitiveness of specific companies. You made a very strong and broad claim: > from an international competition's pov they give companies less room to emerge from within the EU, weakening it in the process I provided a counter-example: companies that *benefited* from these regulations being in place in EU. |
@feliks the disadvantage Lidl has in this case is not related to EU regulations, but to the fact that it is entering an oligopolized market with strong economies of scale.
GDPR gives Lidl an *advantage* here. And that was my point, which was in direct response to your claim that EU regulations put companies at a disadvantage.
Point being: these same regulations put other companies at an advantage or at least level the playing field a bit.