> Twitter estimates the "range of probable loss" it faces in the probe is between $150 million and $250 million
That's close to 10% of Twitter's annual revenue. How do the likes of Google and Facebook get away with fines <1% of annual revenue? This seems disproportionate. I am not taking a position on whether it should be higher or lower, just that it appears unbalanced.
Because the modern web is based entirely around invading the privacy of every user as much as possible in order to sell their private details to advertisers. If Twitter's money came from users in the form of subscriptions or purchases, rather than from advertisers in the form of paid, targeted ads, this would be guarded information, rather than shared.
Part of the difference is that Twitter has much lower revenue per user than the other two. If you frame the fine as "$X per user impacted" rather than as "y% of your revenue" then it seems more proportional.
That's close to 10% of Twitter's annual revenue. How do the likes of Google and Facebook get away with fines <1% of annual revenue? This seems disproportionate. I am not taking a position on whether it should be higher or lower, just that it appears unbalanced.