So we're willing to throw all this interconnection away, the one thing that made the internet the place it is? The interconnected nature of the internet is what made me the person I am today. I have more friends from other countries than I have friends from my own and from my friendship circles I know I'm not the only one.
So what? "Only safe based on not encountering bad actors" is far and away the dominant mode of security everywhere. It's what keeps your house unburgled, your planes in the air, and your family alive. Breaking into a house, taking down a plane, and murdering strangers all require very little in the way of skill or planning. Burglary and murder are also unlikely to be caught (absent a connection to the victim).
Why not? Facebook, or some other centralized cloud service, is not the only way you have of using the Internet.
If the end of Safe Harbor spells disaster for all those centralized cloud services, that might actually turn out to be a good thing for the Internet in the long term.
We often think of decentralized peer-to-peer networks as a rebellious technology, something we need to develop in order to evade oppressive laws in an increasingly dystopian world. But what if decentralization becomes the only legal way to create and maintain a global social network? That would be ironic but also deeply satisfying.
My only worry is that this ruling might not spell enough of a disaster to shake up the VCs' faith in the centralized cloud.
Yes, it's a concern that the Internet won't be global anymore, but it never really was. Up until thing like Firesheep and Snowden, and still to some extent, a lot of Internet traffic was only safe based on not passing any bad actors.