I’m sorry, but I think you’re mistaken. May I ask where you got this information?

As I understand it, the DPF is merely an executive order and not a federal law, so it’s very limited in what it can do. It doesn’t create the ability to enforce fines through US courts because breaking the GDPR is still perfectly legal under US law.

This loophole is still used unfortunately. For example, Clearview AI was fined by various data protection authorities, but their fines cannot be enforced so the company just never paid up.l

Good.

Even if you computer is not exposed to the internet: are you certain that every other device on the network is safe (even on public wifi)? Would you immediately raise the alarm if you saw a second printer in the list with the same name, or something like “Print to file”? I think I personally could fall for that under the right circumstances.

Is this a threat?

This doesn’t advocate for any substantial improvement of data protections. It’s merely a convenience argument to legitimize banning Chinese cars for economic reasons. American car manufacturers will continue to harvest and sell all your data, just with less competition.

Of course, this isn’t a surprise coming from the CFR, the lobbying organization for US imperialism.

“Safe” being defined in a user-hostile manier, i.e. with unmodified Google components and not rooted.

“Google-controlled” would be a better word.

peace

(Subject to availability in your area)

With this approach you would lose the subvolume structure and deduplication if I’m not mistaken.

Obviously acquiring publicly available data is legal

Under the EU GDPR it is often not legal. Controllers need a legal basis, which only exists if there is an appropriate relationship between the controller and the data subject.

No, you got downvoted because you were insulting and incorrect.

The most common physical attacks will be you misplacing your device or some friend/burglar/cop taking it. FDE works great in those scenarios.