If Apple is so pro-privacy like they claim, then they'd look for the most strict international privacy laws and abide by them. Then they could feel safe in knowing they could release the product anywhere. The fact they want to make the product available under the "rules" of the least privacy protecting countries first says a lot to me

> This slows down deploying the system globally. Particularly if the target is moving, it may make sense to build lightly so one can pivot, and then build in the compliance stuff after you know you have a winning configuration

This kind of approach is how startups justify everything, however for established companies this would be backward.

I get a feeling that Apple never wanted to do it. They already knew the compliance requirements existed and if they would have wanted to test things then the narrative could have that they are rolling out in other markets first and would roll out with compliance in EU later. Asking for exemption was a bet they tried to play here, they lost and now spinning the narrative.

Laws and strategy are not fixed, and public bickering is part of how they get optimized.

Then don’t deploy it for Pete’s sake if you can’t guarantee basic privacy.

> This slows down deploying the system globally.

Good. Pretty much everything should roll out way slower.

I imagine complying with all kinds of laws and regulations slows releases in some way or another and having none of them would allow people to ship faster, so what makes these EU regulations so distinct? Do what you have to do to comply with the law and release, as always.

[dead]