In truth, regulation can only reliably protect your privacy from well-behaved actors whose actions/violations are observable.
If you've taken no self-help measures to limit access, then bad actors, unobservable to you and regulators, will still be doing whatever they would like to do and can get away with.
But you may be lulled into a false sense of security by the false promise of a 'solution' via regulations.
As I've now learned, you used to work for the Internet Archive. You should probably start your statements with that.
> If you've taken no self-help measures to limit access...
robots.txt was a nice self-help measure.
> ... then bad actors, unobservable to you and regulators, will still be doing whatever they would like to do and can get away with.
Regulators still have to follow regulations. You are right that I can't stop someone from creating offline archives - but they're not really who I am worried about. Nor am I worried about the small servers that keep copies of documents during transmission, unless of course they're doing so for criminal reasons.
Should you start all of your statements with a list of every project you've ever worked on? Show me an example of how it's done before you make such an exceptional request of me.
For any who are more curious about a commenters' background than their current words, my profile already links to copious resources on my work history, & writings, beyond what's typical of contributors here.
Yes, if I was commenting on a project or company that I had self-interest in (eg: reputational, monetary, etc) then I would add a disclaimer like everyone else here does.
"Everyone else here" does not do that. Disclosures are spotty, & chiefly in relation to current-employment. And many agree links-in-bio are a sufficient & appropriate way to disclose affiliations: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=27209830
My "self-interest" in the Archive is exactly the agreement-with-its-mission that is self-evident by my strong opinions. The post words themselves are a stronger disclosure-of-interest than any extra mention of previous employment would be.
And further, all sorts of extensive details of my projects & work history – and not just with respect to the current topic! – are described a couple clicks away.
Have you disclosed anything about your "reputational, monetary, etc" "self-interest", here or on any other topic? Show me how you do it, inquistor. Or, do you somehow manage to only ever comment on things in which you have no personal interest, nor related professional involvements?
Note that I fully support your right not to declare such things.
It's just rich to criticize someone like myself – with neither hidden opinions nor a hidden work history – from your perch of obfuscation.
If you've taken no self-help measures to limit access, then bad actors, unobservable to you and regulators, will still be doing whatever they would like to do and can get away with.
But you may be lulled into a false sense of security by the false promise of a 'solution' via regulations.