Puts

Sorry, you're right of course! :)

I mean there is no secret that Teenage Engineering is very inspired by the European early and mid 1900s design movement. I remember hearing an interview with Jesper Kouthoofd the lead Designer about how they approach product design in the same way as graphic design, just with more surfaces then a paper. Everything is based on a grid (Josef Muller-Brockmann and the International design movement), with focus on simple shapes and a few primary colors (Bauhaus). And just comparing the OB-4 speaker with the Braun T520 radio I think it's safe to say that Dieter Rams has also been a great inspiration.

So for sure there is a lot of European design heritage going in to these products. But personally I think the main reason we don't see this kind of design coming from the US right now simply comes down to the fact that minimalism as a concept goes against typical North-American culture.

> Or maybe they just stuck it out and edited every page manually when they wanted to change the header or footer.

We had a tool for this called frames!

Or like all of us who delete all cookies automatically when closing the browser.

The Linux kernel have had 12,000 engineers working on it while still being a monolith.

What kind of crackpot wrote this? Most new money "printed" is already digital and created through debt. If anything a digital currency would allow central banks to create more money without creating more debt.

Uptime has nothing to do with anything in the real world. It's a number you put in an SLA of how much downtime is acceptable before they start paying you back money. And 99.9% still means 43 minutes of downtime every month. And even after that it's a calculation of risk. What does full redundancy cost vs paying back the fees for a say 24 hours of downtime? A lot of the time paying back money is way way cheaper then actually investing in technical redundancy.

Maybe we need a reminder every now and then that text-files are quite capable and except from being faster to parse in a lot of situation has the benefits of being "future safe" and easy to backup and compress as well.

When it comes to security and SQL in general I think stored procedures are underappreciated. Bring back the DBA roll and make procedures for everything. Then you don't even have to build that API-layer. SQL is your API. And for things like password hashes, there doesn't even have to be a user that can read the hash-column, let a stored procedure compare them for you and there's no risk of leaking password hashes (unless the whole server gets compromised of course).

Well this is defensively not gonna make it easier to get a new agreement for data transfer between EU and US.

Agree. This feels very much like a "if all you have is a hammer" kind of problem. You could probably create enough energy to get the reading by shaking the test for a few seconds and at least eliminate the battery.

And their coming child deserves to have lower IQ and increased risk of cancer because of heavy metals ending up in the ground water because of batteries in single use items. /s

This made me very depressed. Such a waste on our precious environment. It's like humanity isn't even trying.

According to the GDPR the burden of proving compliance is on the controller by keeping paper trails and documentation. So technically they would already need to be able to prove were all data has come from, or else they can't have it. So either they start untangling or they delete it. :)

At least it seems like the head of the Danish intelligence services is actually facing charges for helping the NSA spy on Swedish politicians: https://www.dw.com/en/danish-spy-chief-detained-over-highly-...

But I think this more then anything shows why the US should not be regarded a country with adequate level of data protection. I would honestly just assume that they force Google to record every single meeting between heads of states or meetings with companies that work in telecom or weapon systems. Even the most boring meeting with officials in some small municipality can probably be valuable information about infrastructure and how it's going to be protected and these are maybe the most unsuspecting because they think "why would anybody care about the water distribution in our small city".

Yes. If you have a Business plan for Workspace you can choose your data region to be in Europe (this is still not water tight but probably the best you can do if you want to use Google Workspace).

Whenever a company tries to sell you their GDPR compliance by stating data is "encrypted at rest" you should call bullshit. If the data is stored on servers that are online the data will never be at rest (until the day the servers are discarded) making this protective measure useless in the context of Schrems II.

The EDPB Guidelines from November 2020 says:

"where unencrypted personal data is technically necessary for the provision of the service by the processor, transport encryption and data-at-rest encryption even taken together, do not constitute a supplementary measure that ensures an essentially equivalent level of protection if the data importer is in possession of the cryptographic keys"

https://edpb.europa.eu/sites/default/files/consultation/edpb...

You could absolutely make that argument. That is why this particular case is so interesting. This is the first time I've seen a ruling regarding this and it may open up for more cases on where to draw the line on when processing is "necessary" and not.

Also it's worth noting that GDPR also puts other demands in place, for example that there be technical measures to protect the data from unauthorized access, or unintentional data loss. If you can argue that a cloud provider can handle those things better, then that may trump the data minimization argument.

This ruling has nothing to do with opt-in or consent. It has to do with the concept of data minimization. According to the GDPR you should only process as much data as necessary and this applies no matter what legal basis (eg consent) you have. So basically the point with GDPR is that you as a user should not even have to care, the company that processes your data is responsible to care for you. And it's actually cool that we see this enforced now.

You would not have made that request in the first place unless that company did the request in the background for you.

It has nothing to do with approval. This specific ruling is about the principle of data minimisation. If you process personal data you must do a risk assessment and make sure you only process no more data then strictly necessary. This applies even if you have consent. So in this case since you can host the fonts yourself to not share data (IP, time, browser agent, cookies) with Google you should.

Well technically you share a lot more data. IP, browser agent, time (which in combination with IP can tell exactly who used that specific computer) and cookies set on the *.google.com domain.

So it's actually interesting that the court only focused on the IP-address although the ruling would probably have been the same even if they widened the scope.

Note that GDPR talks about data minimisation - data you should not share more data then necessary. If there are no other way then linking to a third party then that would be just fine. But if there is another way to do it that don't requires you to share someone else data you should do that instead (in this case self host the fonts).

Also consent may not actually help here because the principle of data minimisation applies no matter what legal basis for the processing you use.

I think this is actually a really interesting ruling because it's based on Article 6 and not Schrems II. The problem is that they are not taking enough steps to share as little data as possible which is a fair point, but it would also be interesting to see if Google Fonts actually is legal in the sense that personal data (IP, browser agent, timestamp) may end up in the US and used for other purposes (tracking) then just delivering a font.

I actually tend to see anything I buy as a black hole that will suck more money into it.

A good example is when you get a bicycle, you do the equation and realize that within two years you will have saved in on the cost of public transportation. But it's when you start using it you realize that suddenly you always end up sweaty arriving to work so you need to buy good ventilated outdoor clothes and then a little bit later the winter arrives and you realize you need the same type of winter clothes, and then your first tier brakes and you realize you don't have any tools, so not only do you need to buy a new tier but also the tools. And here the initial smart calculation has fallen apart long time ago.

Don't get me wrong. There's a lot of benefits riding a bike to work so it may still be very much worth it. But once you have this realization you can apply the same logic to anything you buy or thinking of buying which may helps prioritizing because there's just so many black holes you can have in your life.

Well we've pretty much been on the verge of a new collapse for just as long but the central banks have been keeping the economy floating by lowering interest and buying bonds. And it's working great. The big question is how long this can go on. The longer we wait the bigger the crash, but what government will wanna be responsible for a crash at all? The thing is that the longer it goes the more apparent it is how fake the current economic system is. It can no longer be considered capitalism any more. A lot of western countries has defaulted into some form of planned economy.

The ironic part is that the non-autistic people wont trust autistic peoples valuable non-biased opinions because of their bias against non-conforming people.

Exactly. And it's also frankly absurd we've been accustomed to the idea of ad networks autonomously publishing content on websites. The idea that a serious magazine would have printed an ad that no-one had seen before would have been bizarre. Today however you see this "get rich fast" and "miracle weight loss" ads on otherwise reputable news sites.

There is no EU legislation that mandates cookie consent. In fact with the GDPR the old cookie-banner law that required you to inform of the usage of cookies was abolished. The cookie banners is the industries own perverted solution to the problem of asking for consent when there is no other legal basis for processing personal information.

This can not be posted too many times.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4XpnKHJAok8

Linus Torvalds talk on Google about how GIT is more a way of working then a piece of software. Everybody commits upwards in a tree of trust. If you do it this way you get automatic code reviews and in any team someone should be responsible for the "product" anyway and highest up in the hierarchy.