Yes, the GDPR covers almost everything you do with personal data. That is the point. As long as you’re being respectful to data subjects the GDPR is surprisingly mild.

You’re the one claiming the government is regulating tech too much, below an article about Apple making that same claim. And when pressed about specifics, you brand the entire thing as off-topic.

It is very much on topic, you just don’t want to provide an argument.

What is wrong with the GDPR and the ePrivacy directive? The only problem I see is that they don’t go far enough (online tracking, for example)

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/joke

Why do you care

Sadly this article is paywalled

Mario was just the fall guy. Clearly the real killer is still out there, continuing his works.

Maybe that was good advice 10 years ago. Nowadays it’s practically impossible to stay anonymous. Most social media make it mandatory to provide your legal name and even if you don’t, the government has many ways to still track you down, because you leave all sorts of traces. The only way out of this is by political change.

If the US or another fascist government wants to kidnap you and send you to a concentration camp, it won’t matter if you posted your info online. Don’t put this blame on the individual.

Thanks, that will solve everything 👍

MS Paint isn’t marketed or treated as a source of truth. LLMs are.

No jokes allowed, this is a serious website.

Breaking an NDA (allegedly) is civil, not criminal

I think I would rather lick Technetium than Lithium

That’s the thing: if he went by Womble at work then that was his name. The fact that the government called him Raymond doesn’t make that his only name, they are both valid.

Fun fact, you can use whatever names you want. All names are made up. Your “legal name” is just what the government calls you, but you can ask other people to call you something else entirely. The same goes with pronouns.

Many EU countries have their own different laws about this stuff. The GDPR likely does not apply here because of the exception for “purely personal and household activities”, article 2(2)©.

I have no doubt that FIFA bribes everyone, including Trump. It’s just in this particular instance that, if it was their intent to bribe Trump with a trophy, they would have created a second one with real gold instead of giving Chelsea a replica. It seems much more likely that Trump just stole it and FIFA didn’t raise a stink about it in order to preserve relations.

If it works it works. You mathematicians just don’t understand the pragmatics. What is tech debt?

It clearly doesn’t make sense that the FIFA would spend a small fortune on creating a trophy, only to give the winner a replica. It is concerning to me that you still take Trump’s word at face value, no matter how obvious and self-serving the lie.

Just more proof that the universe is flat