[di4na]

You are right. The only solutions are to not host in the US and/or have a parent company in the US. And/Or to get the US to apply basic human rights.

There are no other real way.

What would have been sufficient is to process all data in EU jurisdiction and transfer HQ to equivalent country.

[Spivak]

But since it's a global network it means that they would have had to up and moved the whole operation into the EU which is pants on head stupid. The moment two countries have incompatible laws it all breaks down. This isn't something that should even concern Meta and should be a US/EU negotiation.

[robin_reala]

It has been a US/EU negotiation. Unfortunately the US is not willing to budge on its principle of “we get to look at whatever we want to without the need for a due process”.

[di4na]

I mean i could tell it otherwise which is that the US should maybe consider providing basic human rights to their citizens and residents.

If they do not, why would the rest of the world let them interact with them and endanger everyone?

[whiplash451]

Can you elaborate on what you mean by basic human rights?

[di4na]

Right to privacy and due process? At least for this specific problem. I recommend going to read the Schrems II opinion by the CJEU, it is quite readable.

After that we can extend to deeper Human Rights but let's start with the basics.

[wmf]

Or don't build global networks. Build local networks and federate them.

[Spivak]

And the moment a user from the UK messages a user in the US?

[wmf]

Ultimately the EU is going to have to come up with a detailed compliance framework. The wording of the GDPR is too high-level and we can't trust companies to self-regulate.

[di4na]

What? The wording is really not high level, it is highly detailed. The fact that we refuse to acknowledge it is not due to the language not being detailed enough