Even when the developments might’ve been considered fairly primitive by modern standards, technological progress has always been a definitive characteristic of humanity. Like any new tool, technology has infinite capacity to be used in all the wrong ways—in this, atomic and biological weapons come to mind. And even with better intentions, sometimes technological impact can still skew negatively, such as when society’s immense reliance on it harms our environment, health, or thought patterns.

We all have our own ways of creating our perfect work environment.

I’m sure you’ll have noticed in the last few years of using smart phones that every time you add a new app, no matter what that app is for, it asks if it can “use your location”. Sure, you get a chance to allow or not, but how many of us just click that allow button without thinking what information that simple choice conveys?

“Scientia potentia est”. “Knowledge is power”.

American companies are hotfooted to clinch the new requirements of the Privacy Shield. Since the European Commission officially adopted the framework on July 12, organizations have scurried to understand the finalized principles, determine the applicability of each, and develop a plan for implementing any necessary privacy mechanisms and controls. Like most legal texts though, the Privacy Shield can be difficult to digest. Some of the principles have been significantly restructured, are riddled with stipulations and situational exceptions, and are a bit ambiguous. Our firm’s fielded an inpouring of questions looking for perspective and advice on which aspects of the Privacy Shield will be the riskiest and most burdensome. Here is my two cents worth on trying to prioritize and tackle some of the essentials.