[gloob]

Perhaps you've just overstated your point, but could you provide any evidence supporting the statements that (1) stronger privacy laws would cause all innovation to stop, or (2) stronger privacy laws would cause us to revert to a 1200 AD level of technological development.

Edit: To make my point less pedantic: your argument, as you have currently phrased it, is every bit as alarmist as those you disagree with, just in the opposite direction. It's like appealing for calm by calling the people you disagree with whores. At best, such a tactic undermines itself.

Actual discussion:

It is self-evidently true that fines for data breaches would discourage companies from allowing more data breaches. You have countered this by saying such a policy would harm innovation. The snarky response would be that harming innovation in the realm of data breaches is exactly what we want to do. A less snarky response would be to ask you to provide any evidence that investing in proper network security would have made Sony less innovative in any measurable way.

[pavel_lishin]

He didn't say that we'd revert; we'd simply never move forward.

[gloob]

Fair enough. Ignore my second question then. Can you point me to a credible argument for the idea that all innovation relies on privacy breaches, or that only companies who hold customer data are capable of innovation, or some other causal link that would make "strong privacy laws -> no innovation ever" hold?

[pavel_lishin]

> Can you point me to a credible argument for the idea that all innovation relies on privacy breaches

Only if you point me to anyone making the case that innovation relies on privacy breaches.