There's a high chance a company will have already paid a large subscription fee to Microsoft for Office 365, and so they don't want to pay yet another licence fee on top for a tool that's already included with that. The people making these financial decisions are usually not the users of said tool.
From my experience that is very very common. Client's hardly ever understand their own processes, everyone knows their little slice of it and where to hand-off work but nobody groks the big picture.
Biometrics are not being used as a password directly. They are typically used as an identifier to unlock the secrets store on the device and then retrieve an access token (which has previously been obtained via username/password authorisation).
The biometric information never leaves the device.
How is the government (a publicly elected body that is subject to being held to account by that same public) telling when you can spend you money somehow worse than a private company (without any accountability) deciding their shitcoin is no longer allowed to trade or that they don't fancy pegging it properly anymore?
People see this as a waste, but that is how team relationships are formed. Jeff from accounts may be eating up time today talking about Batman, but 3 months down the line you'll be ringing him up saying "hey buddy, I need a favour on those TPS reports" and he'll oblige because you've formed a bond. It's human nature.
I found WFH was great when we all left the office en masse and had already got a close-knit team. Changing jobs during the pandemic and trying to build new relationships remotely was really, really hard because that human-level interaction wasn't there.
You can’t generalise Tesla as representing all EVs. They’re the only ones who have this remote control of your car and restricted availability of parts. No other manufacturer does this.
I agree it’s not a healthy model long-term, just hoping it stays niche with Tesla rather than other manufacturers joining in.
The guidelines are pretty clear on what processing is, what data it covers and who controllers are in those circumstances. The biggest flaw I see is people don't read them and assume any data in any context is bound by it and it becomes a stick to beat everything with when it's not required.
I'm afraid your example is a prime case of that - leaving a hat at school that happens to have your name on it clearly doesn't fall within the remit of data processing under GDPR, it's a strawman (straw boater?) argument
I also don't agree it's a bad thing to make no distinction on size of company, doing so would leave a grey area of when a thing becomes "big enough" to transition from outside to inside scope and therefore gaps in the enforcement.
If you want to build a hobby forum, you're free to do it without requiring my personal data. If you want to collect my data for analysis or marketing then I absolutely want you to abide by the rules and look after it even if you're a lone programmer in his basement.