[gucci-on-fleek]

> Meanwhile, the EU decides that its most important issue is adjudicating whether a Supreme Court ruling will prevent its citizens from using Instagram.

The EU hasn't decided or prioritized anything here yet. NOYB has decided that this issue is important, but they're a non-profit organization that is completely unrelated to any government. NOYB will eventually take this issue to the EU courts, but the courts are independent of the other branches of government, and are required to adjudicate any valid complaint, so regardless of what their ruling is, you can't really attribute that to "the EU" either.

[epsteingpt]

Obviously a caricature, but you must engage with the substance of the underlying issue.

If you have watched the EU's approach to U.S. tech cos (DMA, DPA) you can see a trend of increased regulation; to where it's not worth sometimes to release apps on the App Store initially to the EU due to GDPR and DMA restrictions.

Appreciate it if you take the technical bite out of the comment and engage in good faith here.

The regulators have repeatedly shown their willingness to look at the pure letter of the law and levy multibillion dollar fines.

Maybe the tech cos deserve it. But what's at hand here is where the investment of time and energy is going in the bloc.

My other comments address why this feels like an issue.

And the hilarious, (IMO) bad faith downvoting suggests the comment actually stings. We must ask why.

[gucci-on-fleek]

> If you have watched the EU's approach to U.S. tech cos (DMA, DPA) you can see a trend of increased regulation

Sure, no dispute here—I agree that in general, the EU has recently being making it more difficult for large American tech companies to do business in Europe.

But I don't think that that applies at all in this specific case. The EU has already been sued twice over US–EU data-sharing agreements, and both times, they fought it all the way to their supreme court, and after they lost, they quickly made new agreements that were essentially equivalent to the old ones. So the EU repeatedly gone to a lot of effort to allow US–EU data-sharing, which suggests that their priorities are the exact opposite of forbidding this.

> And the hilarious, (IMO) bad faith downvoting suggests the comment actually stings. We must ask why.

I can't speak for the others, but I personally downvoted your top-level comment because the sentence that I quoted was factually incorrect. I don't agree with your other points, but they seem like valid opinions, so I wouldn't have downvoted for those alone.

(And FWIW, I'm Canadian, so I have no vested interests in either side here)

[epsteingpt]

Fair enough. Exaggerated wildly for effect.

Got the effect shrug

[watwut]

If GDPR is an issue, you are planning to abuse peoples data.

DMA has nothing to do with small apps.

[epsteingpt]

You are right - it's the DSA that makes you publish your contact information publicly if you're a trader.

[alextingle]

I down voted you because you accused the GP of bad faith, rather than genuinely engaging with their point.

Don't dig yourself further into that hole by slinging "bad faith" around willy nilly.

[epsteingpt]

You really look at my original comment and think - "yeah that deserves a BIIIIG round of downvotes?" And then I come back and engaged and then you think I'm digging myself in a hole?

I'm having a substantive debate on a difficult issue with different perspectives.

Woof.

And to be clear, I did engage with his point, if only indirectly.

Saying "noyb" isn't the EU is like saying a major influencer like Tucker Carlson isn't the U.S. government. Technically correct, but underrating the influence and alignment it has inside the bloc.

"Yes, noyb (None Of Your Business) is highly popular and influential in the EU. Founded in 2017 in Vienna by prominent privacy advocate Max Schrems, the non-profit organization functions as a leading strategic litigation center that enforces the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR)."

It really pains me that even after all this effort, you get downvoted 'for cause.' the discussion unfortunately continues to get worse here.