[seorphates]

1. That's certainly one way to observe reality.

2. Competition for your otherwise private or your public data sets?

3. Right, because China has bad habits therefore all your data should for sale.

I'm kind of leaning the other way, really. I'll take the privacy laws and let tech adapt or die. The only part that I actually need is the pipe anyway (sort of the antithesis to big content AND data brokers, I guess, but there you go).

[sqdbps]

I don't care what you're 'leaning' towards or what you can do without, this is about what's good for the nation.

This kind of legislation is not pertinent to the average citizen and this whole debate is being conducted in an environment of hysteria around the cambridge analytica episode which is being fueled by political opportunism.

[seorphates]

How an individual's data is or is not handled is not pertinent to that individual? That seems an absurd position to take much less impose onto others via some sort of princely directive.

It would seem like you have skin in the game of free-wheeling and dealing with folks and their data. That or just some passion without premise. What's good for the nation is (re)adapting to privacy - likewise its peoples and doubly so for the state. I also don't see your directive influencing those people's actions either, so it appears some other people disagree, too.