4. If it is personal data, you have to know where they came from, where they are stored and why. If you don't want to do that, then invest the minimal effort it takes to anonymize them during ingestion and then you can do whatever you want with them.
5. Now that is just false, or you have some really bad architects, if you are so sensitive to new legal interpretation (which there haven't been any significant ones)
Why does everything needs to be pro EU or anti EU. Yes, consumer privacy is more protected in EU. And yes it has directly caused EU R&D budget to become significantly smaller. And yes it has led to ad revenue decrease and created more problem for small companies who can't use non targeted ad.
If you are arguing against any of these, for which there are lot of data I think you are not up for discussion.
Where is the GP taking a pro-EU or anti-EU stance? Where are they arguing against "ad revenue decrease" which "created more problem for small companies", or the impact of GDPR on the EU R&D budget?
1. all text data is personal data so yeah you can’t anonymize it, you need to have. a central metadata tracking of all datasets - this is a more challenging problem than it appears from on high.
2. i don’t see how you can look at, for instance, random EU jurisdictions not allowing Google Fonts on your website due to GDPR ( but only some jurisdictions and only years after the law was passed) and see that as inconsistent and moving target enforcement - and that is just one well known example of many many many
5. Now that is just false, or you have some really bad architects, if you are so sensitive to new legal interpretation (which there haven't been any significant ones)