European (generalizing) models seem to have the problem that they generalize restrictions while specifying permissions.

E.g. 'Thou shalt not store & use personal data'

Overridden by 'Thou may store and use personal data, in a banking context, with clear user permission presented in an interactive graphical format, for user requests pertaining to tax information'

DENY ALL + PERMIT {SITUATION} is not a recipe for innovation.

Versus I'd say the US model is PERMIT ALL + DENY {SITUATION}.

And India's model appears to be PERMIT ALL (in theory) + ARBITRARY BUREAUCRATIC DENY (in practice).

Whereas Thompson's point seems to be that national champions effectively simplify this into the US model, albeit with a chokepoint / revenue siphon. Perhaps South Korea as a similar example?

Yeah, God forbid consumers will be protected.

For years people's data was used as currency without their knowledge. How is that capitalism? Markets without transparency are not free. Europe is trying to maintain a fair market. While big tech (well, big everything) is trying constantly to subvert the market while pretending to make the world a better place.

Europe couldn't even manage to implement Linux in Berlin! The capitalist pressure is what really works there in the farce of socialism. Even with GDPR, those who got penalized where small websites, IT Shops, bloggers, etc. for not knowing their intricate rules while the big fish went unscathed.