The European Commission just hit a major social platform with a $140 million penalty—marking the first enforcement action under their newly minted tech regulations. What's catching attention isn't just the fine itself, but the selective targeting. Only one platform faced consequences while others seemingly skated by, raising questions about enforcement consistency.



This selective approach has sparked debate across tech and crypto communities. For Web3 advocates, it's a familiar pattern: centralized authorities wielding regulatory power in ways that feel arbitrary. Some see echoes of old-world gatekeeping dressed up in modern compliance language.

The broader implication? As governments worldwide ramp up tech oversight, platforms enabling free expression and decentralized communication might face increasing pressure. Whether this signals a trend or remains an isolated case, it's a reminder that regulatory frameworks are still catching up to digital realities—and not always evenly.
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
SchrodingerWalletvip
· 12-05 20:51
LOL, here comes the selective enforcement again, this is just absurd. --- Only punishing one company? Isn't this blatant discrimination? --- This is obviously power acting up, Web3 saw through this long ago. --- The government's methods are really just old tricks in a new bottle, still the same under the guise of compliance. --- Selective targeting... This is exactly what happens with centralized stuff, double standards are no small matter. --- Yet another "I make the rules, I enforce the rules" trick, just like before. --- Why are other platforms fine then? This logic just doesn't convince. --- Looks like platforms that allow free expression have to be prepared to be targeted. --- Inconsistent enforcement, that's the biggest problem here. --- Familiar routine, power is always this capricious.
View OriginalReply0
FOMOSapienvip
· 12-05 20:47
1. Here we go again, selective enforcement... Isn't this just a new trick of traditional authorities, punishing one company to warn the others? 2. 140 million euros? That’s a real hit, but why is only this one company targeted... Feels a bit intentional. 3. Trust me, centralized regulation always plays the same games. This is exactly why Web3 exists. 4. Something’s off—one platform gets fined, but the others are just fine... How are these rules being applied? 5. I told you, consistency doesn’t exist. Authorities always enforce the rules however they feel like. 6. This is why we need decentralized stuff... One gets made an example of, but the rest keep running. 7. 140 million looks scary, but the real issue is why this company was chosen. That’s the scary part. 8. Seriously, this kind of selective punishment in Web3 would be called unfair, but in traditional finance it’s called regulation... Hilarious. 9. The rules are still trying to catch up with reality, let alone being applied fairly. 10. Same old story, centralized systems are always like this... Some platforms get picked out as examples to scare the rest.
View OriginalReply0
LadderToolGuyvip
· 12-05 20:45
The EU is really good at double standards, only penalizing one platform while letting all the others off the hook. We've seen this trick too many times in crypto.
View OriginalReply0
BitcoinDaddyvip
· 12-05 20:44
Blatant double standards—this is the true face of centralized power. The EU always enforces selectively, a typical old elite trick. Trust me, the future of Web3 will be born out of this kind of injustice. It's still the same playbook, just with different wording. Why only fine one company? There’s something fishy about this. The rules were tailored for the big players from the start. Why not investigate everyone? It’s obvious they’re targeting a specific platform. Web3 has seen enough of these tactics...
View OriginalReply0
YieldHuntervip
· 12-05 20:41
ngl, if you look at the data on regulatory enforcement patterns, this selective targeting screams political theater. technically speaking, they're just picking winners and losers like it's a defi protocol with suspicious governance...
Reply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)