cccbbbaaa

15 ms·

1. 151.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   If they did follow EU laws, Bard would be available there…
2. 152.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   More like GDPR violation thanks to Schrems II.
3. 153.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   Plenty of people already argued that LLMs don't actually learn like a human. However, you should keep in mind the reason why clean-room reverse engineering exists: humans learn from source material. FLOSS RE projects (e.g. nouveau) t
4. 154.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   I don't know about other laws, but GDPR does not say “immediately”, but “without undue delay”. In practice, it is within one month, extensible by up to two months (cf. art 12).
5. 155.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   It replaced Python for everything longer than a couple hundred of lines long for me. Fast language, fast compile times, clean(-ish) syntax, strong typing system, good ecosystem, and now multicore support? Yes please! I must be more nuance
6. 156.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   I get that. I'm saying that what you think is missing in existing privacy laws, actually already exists.
7. 157.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   > GDPR requires you to request consent for any cookies the “could” be used to identify you, which makes them personal information. > So if you want to use cookies to link a user’s sessions on your own website together (without actual
8. 158.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   Data retention limitations are absolutely a thing in GDPR and previous European laws (ie. Informatique et Libertés).
9. 159.▲
   by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

   Because DNT barely existed when ePrivacy was last amended, back in 2009.
10. 160.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

    It depends on the product range. G0s and G4s seems to be available on mouser.
11. 161.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

    I'm pretty sure Arduino already sold better boards based on Atmel SAMD for years (the Zero and various Nanos). Also, Arduino is not the only game in town. I recently bought two Nucleo G431KBs; it costed me less than a single Uno R3,
12. 162.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 3y ago

    DNT barely existed when ePrivacy was last amended, back in 2009.
13. 163.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Not sure why we should want to make companies less responsible in the first place. Anyway, as I said earlier, GDPR does not imposes burdens specifically on websites, but on any kind of PII processing. It is not the place to add provisions
14. 164.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    The DNT header already exists. Go figure out why it is ignored (is it too user friendly?) And since the GDPR has a large reach (it covers PII in all form, not only stored digitally), it is not the place to mandate it.
15. 165.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    And GDPR forbids holding the data for longer than necessary, except in some very restricted cases (cf. art. 5(1)e.)
16. 166.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Which is to be expected: GDPR basically is a harmonisation of the various privacy laws that existed in various member states before.
17. 167.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    As I can't find when olestra products were sold in the EU, the answer seems to be “no”. Don't hesitate to prove me wrong though.
18. 168.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    I'm afraid you are wrong for the global disallow button, as informed and specific consent is necessary to allow the processing of personal information, not to forbid it. See the definition in article 4(11), and the definition of the b
19. 169.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    I know that cookie banners exist since ePrivacy. That's why I mentioned it. But ePrivacy does _not_ mandate them. The adtech industry could have respected the DNT header.
20. 170.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Because similar laws already existed in member states, sometimes for literal decades, before GDPR came along.
21. 171.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Neither ePrivacy nor GDPR require cookie consent popups, instead they basically say that tracking requires consent. GDPR only mentions cookies once, in its recitals. It's the adtech industry that decided to ignore DNT.
22. 172.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Thankfully, there is still 38 pages left after that quote. You will have a hard time finding a flowchart in a law though… Anyway, my point was that the fines dispensed nowadays are sensible. As for the future, DPAs know very well that the
23. 173.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    > The fine is arbitrarily decided. There isnt anything solid governing the amount if the fine is not % of revenue This is wrong. See GDPR article 83, and https://edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2022-05/edpb_gu
24. 174.▲
    by cccbbbaaa 4y ago

    Per your link, proportionality seems to be working. Big fines are directed towards big companies (cf. Fines Statistics). For individuals (“private person” or “private individual”), it seems they mostly are fined 3-digits amounts, with som