[progmetaldev]

It's hard to discover how much money is being made off selling user data, and I think this only leads to smaller companies trading in user data to disappear, while the larger players can do more with your data behind the scenes. The larger companies having fewer competitors allows them to spend more of their time on finding ways that are "legal" to track users, ones which are technically in compliance with existing laws. Maybe my way of thinking about the situation is different than yours, and I could also be completely wrong. I am just much more pessimistic when it comes to how much value is in user data (especially as AI develops more), to think that larger players won't do anything they can to collect user data by finding loopholes in the law, or allowing themselves to be taken to court because the laws aren't defined well enough.

[belorn]

Larger companies has always been able to break the law and get away with it. That is unlikely to change. However laws do have an effect on such companies, because their protection is only as strong as people are willing to give them exceptions. When they break the law too much and looses popular support, the result in targeted laws that either break the large companies into smaller chunks or impose additional laws that just target the big companies (sometimes by name).

[progmetaldev]

I agree with you, but I think that having fewer smaller players makes it easier for bigger ones to get away with far too much. If smaller players existed, they could fight to keep the amount of data extracted smaller so they were able to continue existing. Of course, this is a dream, but worth thinking about (at least in my head as a though experiment on keeping privacy more constrained so bigger companies didn't have as much to work with).