[hk__2]

> Sure, one of the most valuable companies on the planet with an army of lawyers doesn't know what it's doing.

This a fallacy, not an argument. [1]

> Or maybe it's because the rules are confusing and messy and you have a different interpretation?

Please point out which rules are confusing and/or messy. Virtualy every single blog post about GDPR points out how it’s well written compared to other juridictions on the same subject. The language is clear and the website provides a Q/A section as well as concrete example for every point.

[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_authority

[manigandham]

Yes, a company worth over half a trillion dollars with access to the best legal teams around the world has authority on whether it has done what it can to be compliant or not. And authority is how the legal system works, not everyone can just practice law without going through the proper education and licensing.

> Please point out which rules are confusing and/or messy.

The comment thread you just replied to -- the one where you seem to saying that random HN commenter is more accurate than Facebook's entire legal team on regulation that is supposed to be unequivocal -- is a start.

[malka]

> Yes, a company worth over half a trillion dollars with access to the best legal teams around the world has authority on whether it is compliant or not.

No, it does not.

[manigandham]

Fine, edited. Although you seem to be missing the point...