Hard to say but in the end my life quality is waaaaaay better after EU accession.

The huge difference between FTC and EC in terms of the mandate of their operation. Whereas the Sherman Law and FTC are operating with aim to protect customers’ rights or something like that, EC anti-monopoly law is oriented just on that: fighting anti-competitive behaviour. The problem is IMHO that “customer rights” is so flexible term, that (with good support in the campaign contributions, I am sure) it is easy to persuade FTC that almost anything you do is perfectly nice. EC’s anti-monopoly mandate is on the other hand rather strict and inflexible.

It’s a mixture… forcing companies into roaming agreements, mandating USB C, CCS2, stuff like that.

Then they propose laws to effectively ban end to end encryption.

EU does seem to be on the forefront when it comes to user rights. It’s always nice to see them not just grazing over the issues

In a case like this, I think they’re mainly worried that the dominance of [insert company] from [insert country] is getting too big.

Yes, but on the other hand, sometimes too much, with all the spying laws they wan to push every semester.

It’s not perfect by any means, but I’m glad to have it and can’t think of any other political organisation doing more “good”.

confirmed

The ratio of helpful/shit behavior is not great, but we do have both.