[JumpCrisscross]

My point is that people balance risk of food-borne illness against variety. Homes are virtually unregulated because we rely on individuals using their social networks. Small restaurants are more strictly controlled. Chains, stricter still. This is a common regulatory pattern for good reasons.

[mrtksn]

You’ll still have legal trouble if your food or drinks harm people.

Same with the web, if you’re coding for your own social circle GDPR is not something you need to comply as long as someone of your social circle is harmed and starts an action against you.

Also, different regulations for different sizes is due to the nature of the business. It’s not that small shops are allowed to be dirtier than the chains.

[JumpCrisscross]

> different regulations for different sizes is due to the nature of the business

Bingo. The intent of the law is fine. But the administrative burden for small projects and teams is inappropriate.

In any case, you originally claimed “small restaurants need to follow hygiene standards just as the big chains” [1]. I was showing that is not true. They follow different rules stemming from common principles.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=17179593

[mrtksn]

The nature of the chain business. Chains do things that small ones don’t and the extra regulations are about that. As I said, small restaurants are not allowed to be dirtier than the chains.

The same goes for the software, if you’re not doing things that Google does then GDPR affects you less than Google.

Seriously, the cost of GDPR compliance is not the same for Google and mom&pop businesses, just like the cost of food safety regulations is not the same for the chains and small restaurants.

You are freaking out for no good reason.