Arthur Besse
cultural reviewer and dabbler in stylistic premonitions
- 90 Posts
- 400 Comments
2·4 天前AI code will likely get to the point where it is just a higher level language
contradictory to existing laws (eg section 230).
Section 230 is US law; this article is about the EU and GDPR.
Operating in multiple countries often requires dealing with contradictory laws.
But yeah, in this case it also seems unfeasible. As the article says:
There is simply no way to comply with the law under this ruling.
In such a world, the only options are to ignore it, shut down EU operations, or geoblock the EU entirely. I assume most platforms will simply ignore it—and hope that enforcement will be selective enough that they won’t face the full force of this ruling. But that’s a hell of a way to run the internet, where companies just cross their fingers and hope they don’t get picked for an enforcement action that could destroy them.
Not really. The decision only states that a service that allows to publish advertisements with personal information must review these
Did you post this after reading only the beginning of the article? Because, around the middle of it, the author foresees and responds to your comment:
Some people have said that this ruling isn’t so bad, because the ruling is about advertisements and because it’s talking about “sensitive personal data.” But it’s difficult to see how either of those things limit this ruling at all.
There’s nothing inherently in the law or the ruling that limits its conclusions to “advertisements.” The same underlying factors would apply to any third party content on any website that is subject to the GDPR.
As for the “sensitive personal data” part, that makes little difference because sites will have to scan all content before anything is posted to guarantee no “sensitive personal data” is included and then accurately determine what a court might later deem to be such sensitive personal data. That means it’s highly likely that any website that tries to comply under this ruling will block a ton of content on the off chance that maybe that content will be deemed sensitive.
Here are some relevant parts of what the court actually wrote:
67 In the present case, it is apparent from the order for reference that Russmedia publishes advertisements on its online marketplace for its own commercial purposes. In that regard, the general terms and conditions of use of that marketplace give Russmedia considerable freedom to exploit the information published on that marketplace. In particular, according to the information provided by the referring court, Russmedia reserves the right to use published content, distribute it, transmit it, reproduce it, modify it, translate it, transfer it to partners and remove it at any time, without the need for any ‘valid’ reason for so doing. Russmedia therefore publishes the personal data contained in the advertisements not on behalf of the user advertisers, or not solely on their behalf, but processes and can exploit those data for its own advertising and commercial purposes.
68 Consequently, it must be held that Russmedia exerted influence, for its own purposes, over the publication on the internet of the personal data of the applicant in the main proceedings and therefore participated in the determination of the purposes of that publication and thus of the processing at issue.
It seems to me that the fact that the nature of the content was itself advertising is not the relevant thing here, but rather the fact that the website had a commercial purpose is. So, maybe this will only apply to websites operated for commercial purposes? 🤔
(I am not a lawyer…)
A company that publishes ads for sexual services without getting confirmation of consent is a risk for the society and this business model should not be allowed.
Is there something I missed which indicates that the sexual nature of the advertisement was a factor in the court’s decision?
819·7 天前see also: Conscription of people with disabilities. It’s ongoing in present-day Ukraine.
your commitment to the bit is truly laudable 🤣
how about we just try it first
😭
when this is over […] we can finally go back
YSK: lemmy growth passed the appealing-to-spammers threshold a long time ago; please do report spam to help mods/admins see and delete it
41·19 天前they were just solid colored without symbols
you are describing a tile-based game other than mahjong
8·20 天前I have to ask: what’s with all the obsession with immutable distro?
I guess the promise of having updates JustWork™? I don’t currently use one but I see the appeal.
However FWIW, unlike its namesake ChromeOS, the “Nixbook OS” this post is about is not actually an immutable distro: the instructions are to install NixOS normally and then clone the nixbook repo into
/etc/nixbookand run itsinstall.sh. Among other things it installs an update service which runs git pull on that repo as well as runningnixos-rebuild boot --upgradeandflatpak update --noninteractive --assumeyesetc.Cheers to this guy for what he’s doing, but the name is a little confusing. This approach works but it is not nearly as robust as the immutable distro paradigm implied by the name.
i checked their website to see if these are real; disappointingly they are not. they do actually have a “conductor’s coal” scent, though.
i haven’t used it myself but https://jmp.chat/ looks good if you’re OK with a US or Canadian number.
there is a lemmy community about it here: !sopranica@lemmy.ml.
the leap from “lower factual error rates than an equally-prompted baseline without retrieval (as judged by an external LLM)” to “enables trustworthy, cross-domain scientific synthesis at scale and establishes the foundation for an ever-expanding encyclopedia”
Or, you know, just block domains that use Microsoft email
I’m guessing you probably don’t realize how many organizations host their email with Microsoft.
I concur, but it would be much easier to make the major version the current year (as many projects do, and Linux should imo) rather than the whole project’s age at the time of a release.
Linux is only 34 years old, btw.