The costs of compliance are not a fundamental property of doing international business (after all, governments can change the cost of compliance or make it cost nothing). The fundamental properties I was referring to are that you are transacting with another nation state's people, and you have no fundamental right to do business with them unless that other nation grants you permission. Just because it is easier to do such business without permission or oversight doesn't change that you are doing the same type of business.

You might not think the costs are fair (and in practice that should be taken into account by regulators, to avoid removing all international trade and thus losing the benefits), but that is not really justification for arguing that this is a departure from how things have always been. Nor is it justification for arguing that you shouldn't care about the laws of other countries you do business with because you don't live there (which is what GGGGP was insinuating).

It is a departure from the way things have always been online.

The EU can certainly demand that web creators jump through hoops, but then they can hardly complain if creators outside the EU decide that interacting with the EU isn't worth the trouble.

Nobody is forcing people to do business with the EU. If you don't like the laws in the EU, then you don't have to do business with the EU. Simple as that.

(My whole point is that a lot of people arguing about GDPR want it both ways, and don't see that it's not strange that countries have rules for doing business with their residents.)