> Do you think it's somehow bad for a car manufacturer to not want to go through the hassle of making their cars conform to the safety standards?

Ah yes, the old "all regulations are equal" argument. It should come as no surprise to you that people view safety regulations on automobiles as vastly different than regulations on what a company can do with data about you.

And there are people that think that seat-belt laws are an affront to human dignity. What's the point?

Safety regulations exist because people wanted them, and the same is true here for privacy and data protections. Unless you can convince EU citizens en mass that they don't want the rights and protections afforded to them by this law then it really doesn't matter what anyone in particular person thinks.

>Obviously from what? Are you a GDPR compliance expert?

You don't need to be a GDPR compliance expert to know that the costs of implementing GDPR are huge and I doubt any GDPR experts actually even exist today.

> You don't need to be a GDPR compliance expert to know that the costs of implementing GDPR are huge

So you don't actually know anything, but you are going to pretend to know that it's "huge".

> I doubt any GDPR experts actually even exist today

Then why be so condescending and pretend that you are actually one?

You only have had to gone through the implementation challenges personally to know that it’s hard and the costs (to do it by the letter) are high. In fact to do it by the letter you’re going to have to hire a law firm to ensure you’re compliant and they’re going to err on the side of caution and take you down a rabbit hole of implementation changes.

Can you give me a concrete example where the GDPR forces you to do a lot of relatively costly stuff that are not worth doing otherwise?

I did. First hire a lawyer to review your GDPR compliance and recommend changes, and also set up an EU representative who can assume liability.