latk

9 ms·

1.
by latk 1y ago
Author here. Yep, that's close to my thinking. I don't actually believe that Cursor (or similar tools) are completely shit. But I worry that the Cursor team perhaps doesn't care whether their product actually delivers value
2.
by latk 4y ago
Offering a service to European consumers? Probably not a big issue. GDPR compliance can be challenging without a suitable mindset, but it's not impossible. * Consider that the GDPR has an extremely broad concept of “personal data” – it
3.
by latk 5y ago
I can't agree, but maybe this is semantics :) For something to be personal data, it must be information that relates to an identifiable natural person. There are two criteria here: (1) it must relate to a natural person, and (2) that p
4.
by latk 5y ago
Identifiability for IP addresses uses an even lower standard. The GDPR says that for something to be truly anonymous, there must not be any “reasonably likely” means for identification, even with the help of third parties, even when relying
5.
by latk 5y ago
> Do you, as the website operator, have the right to copy and serve these fonts to your visitors? All the fonts on Google Fonts are open source. When GDPR came into force in 2018 I downloaded all the fonts I needed, checked their license
6.
by latk 5y ago
The court judgement addresses this exact point. There are previous judgements ( Breyer v Bundesrepublik Deutschland ) that establish that dynamic IP addresses are personal data. There are reasonable means to identify the data subject with t
7.
by latk 5y ago
I discussed that argument over here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=30139489 Summary: A company did try the “it was the browser, not us” argument in the “Fashion ID” case. The court did not fall for it. Data controlle
8.
by latk 5y ago
> The fact is that CDNs and similar third party services play an important role. They no longer do, since browsers implemented cache isolation. > if I "host" my fonts in S3 do I have to get consent for sharing IP with Amazon
9.
by latk 5y ago
This argument was tried in the Fashion ID case. A company had inserted Facebook Like buttons on the web page, and argued that it was not responsible for the ensuing disclosure of personal data (such as IP addresses or possible tracking co
10.
by latk 5y ago
Careful. That is an 100% unofficial site. It is not chartered or funded by the EU. The linked article is from “Richie Koch”an editor working on human rights stories who wrote the article on behalf of Proton VPN, which runs the GDPR.eu site
11.
by latk 5y ago
JSON lets you write numbers. They can have a sign, decimal part, and an exponent. The standard euphemistically describes this as: > JSON is agnostic about the semantics of numbers. […] JSON instead offers only the representation of numb
12.
by latk 5y ago
If a study is observing how human reacts to a certain situation, that's research with human subjects. The Linux study observed how maintainers react to bugs, this CCPA/GDPR request spam observed how data protection staff reacts to
13.
by latk 5y ago
There is like 15 years of official guidance and case law on ePrivacy, with relevant guidance from the Art 29 Working Party (precursor to the current EDPB) published around 2014. But I don't think regulators are in a hurry to get into a
14.
by latk 5y ago
TTDSG is finally a correct implementation of the 2005 ePrivacy directive. § 25 TTDSG literally just rephrases the exact ePrivacy requirements. The pendant to the above quote is § 25 Abs 2 Nr 1: > Die Einwilligung nach Absatz 1 ist nicht
15.
by latk 5y ago
It's a legal term the EU came up with to cover things like websites and apps in a technology-agnostic manner.
16.
by latk 5y ago
You're quoting something about “5G Ultra Wideband”, which seems to be a brand name for mmWave. Yes, mmWave has very short range. But 5G isn't just mmWave. It's in many ways an evolution of LTE/4G, supporting the same fre
17.
by latk 5y ago
Transport encryption is table stakes. It's really no longer something that can be mentioned as if it were something special. When I browse to a random website I don't think “wow HTTPS, so secure”. The channel client <-> serv
18.
by latk 5y ago
Would separate SSD metadata devices help if the pool, as in Heap.io's case, already consists entirely of SSDs? It's obviously a win for a use case like Rsync.net's where the data is less “hot”and therefore uses much more cost
19.
by latk 5y ago
The site does explain its methodology. By default, it shows the costs when using the cheapest post-paid plan with at least 500MB allowance for at least 30 days – cheapest in absolute terms, not per GB. You can toggle the option to show prep
20.
by latk 5y ago
Probably a call-back to this post that made the rounds on HN a few months ago: https://www.brandons.me/blog/write-code-not-too-much-mostly-...
21.
by latk 5y ago
Every EU company has been having these compliance problems since the Privacy Shield invalidation in last year's Schrems II judgement. It is only Facebook that had the lawyers (and the gall) to sue the Irish DPC to prevent them from enf
22.
by latk 5y ago
It is primarily the authors view. The proposed regulation – like many EU regulations – can also apply to non-EU entities. In this sense, the EU does try to exert extraterritorial jurisdiction. However, this is constrained to the case where
23.
by latk 5y ago
The text in question does define more closely what it means to offer services in the EU. To lawyers (and to anyone who has experience with GDPR compliance) this is not a particularly vague statement. Admittedly, there's no unambiguous
24.
by latk 6y ago
When using a legitimate interest (opt-out) as a legal basis, the interest must be both legitimate AND outweigh the data subject's rights and freedoms. This requires a balancing test between the various factors to be performed first. Si
25.
by latk 6y ago
They were not asking for consent in the meaning used by the GDPR. They are merely "asking" you to agree to updated terms, i.e. their contract with you. GDPR allows processing of data under various legal bases. They use consent (op
26.
by latk 6y ago
Since this is about cookies and IP addresses, GDPR is not the most relevant EU law. Instead, we have to look at the old ePrivacy Directive. For cookies or any other access to information stored on the user's device, that access must ei
27.
by latk 6y ago
Yes, what you say is more precise than what I said. They did a lot of fixing and by now nearly all sites use the same codebase (incl frontend), apparently with feature toggles for some sites (e.g. Stackapps or Meta have unique mechanics but
28.
by latk 6y ago
When SO took off they thought they could replicate the success with other sites. This lead to the original trilogy (SO, SuperUser, ServerFault) and the Area51 site to propose new sites, of which many betas were started. Turns out few beta
29.
by latk 6y ago
At this valuation an acquisition is less likely. I would have rather expected an acquisition by Microsoft than a series E, but I guess it's too late now. That would leave an eventual IPO as the only way out, but they'd need to bre
30.
by latk 6y ago
> Or the sites that don't bother with compliance and just show a message to the effect of 'this site operates under a jurisdiction that may have different privacy laws to your country' and leaves it at that. That's po

More ›