It’s all come as a bit of a surprise to me. Shame really as there are some really good

business cases to take advantage of this.

Essentially seems to be a badly thought out, restrictive implementation of a nice intention somebody probably once had. Unfortunately they’ve realised that it is not in the best interests of a lot of people / companies who they need on board, and requires extra effort and self discipline in order to make it work, and rather than really think about it and involve joe public (“the user”) on how they’d like it to work, they’ve seemingly implemented it using “experts” who are obsessed by process and order, stuck with a mindset of decades back, and they have advised enforcing it by hugely restrictive laws which most people will be found breaking in one way or another even if there is no malicious intention. We will only see the problems it gives, and the level to which it is enforced, over the next year or two. My guess is that no institution or company will want to, nor can afford to, spend the time operationally on it to really control it other than making a few examples of poor unsuspecting folk (and a couple of showcase prosecutions of organisations being genuinely nefarious). They will realise that, despite its good intentions, the only way they can govern such a massive impact on law would be to enlist or convince parts of the general public to themselves monitor and report breaches.

Bit like communism really.

Posted By: Steve in Holland, May 25, 09:37:27