Big companies arent suffering any of those. But small businesses and individuals are. Just see the enforcement lists. They are fining small flower shops that sent emails to 20-30 people, some of whom subscribed to it decades ago, then forgot. Or small internet startups for missing one subscription record and whatnot. Like all other corporate moat-building efforts, GDPR has been successful in destroying small businesses in favor of big ones.
There isnt any irony here. Huawei equipment was investigated by British and German intelligence agencies and was found to have no backdoors. That's why some countries are heavily buying it.
This sounds funny now. But Hetzner has been moving into a cloud direction consistently. They recently rolled out VPCs, load balancers and all that. They are slowly building the blocks to provide what we generally call a cloud.
This became just more regulatory moat-building to protect the lagging domestic European auto industry. And by 'auto industry' it means the industry of 2-3 countries. And that means basically 2-3 brands and no more. Other economic regions will retaliate in kind.
They are made so in the Angloamerican West. The establishment wants them to focus on 'values' instead. Because if the people started thinking about material conditions, they would topple the system that concentrates 99% of the wealth in the hands of the 0.1%.
> The E.U. making life difficult for U.S.-based monopolists, and the U.S. making life difficult for E.U.-based monopolists? For a net effect of life being difficult for all monopolists?
Its not only for monopolists. The first victims of regulatory moat-building are always small businesses and individuals.They cant pay the fines.
The general did not 'refuse' to crush the protests because the government did not want to crush them - the protesters were Maoists, who thought that the government had become too capitalist and wanted the army to do a coup to return to Maoism. They were preventing the tanks from getting out of the square - not entering - for that reason, and that's what the Tankman was doing in the magically cut/edited video of the BBC. Magically, because they cut a ~2 minute footage to almost 10 seconds, to parts showing only the close plane, because if you show it zoomed out, it becomes evident that the tankman was preventing the tanks from exiting the square.
And no, he did not die or anything - he just walked away with his bags full of food in the end - the food which he was carrying back to his comrades in the square, who were preventing the army from leaving.
Do you have any sources for that claim? You are correct that scene happened as the tanks were leaving but the rest of what you said isn’t back up by anything I’ve seen.
reply