bleistift2
@bleistift2@feddit.de
- Comment on PSA: Don't eat cicadas if you're allergic to shellfish... or at all 2 days ago:
It’s interesting that even on lemmy people aren’t so open-minded to give eating insects a chance.
- Comment on How to opt out of the privacy nightmare that comes with new Hondas 3 days ago:
We cannot stop collecting data about you because collecting the datum that you want to stop having your data collected failed.
- Comment on Western media launders israeli lies to manufacture more consent for Genocide 4 days ago:
I don’t see evidence that Hamas attacked the base, either. Is a hole in a tent and a picture of a tank that could be taken anywhere there is sand supposed to be evidence?
- Comment on Elder Scrolls and Fallout devs Bethesda want to release games more often, but making them last is more important 1 week ago:
So they want to increase the amount of bugs they ship?
- Comment on Antybooties 1 week ago:
I’m not sure… ants walk really far. Think of how long it takes us to get human children to the point where they can count to 1000. Do ants just hatch with a sense of numbers?
- Comment on fossil fuels 3 weeks ago:
I did provide the price for a train ticket that is significantly cheaper than Match!!’s “thousands of dollars”, didn’t I?
- Comment on fossil fuels 3 weeks ago:
So you’re telling me that there are people who cannot peel a banana, but who can simultaneously peel the plastic off a container and then eat the banana?
- Comment on Windows 10 will start pushing users to use Microsoft accounts. How to turn it off. 3 weeks ago:
You vastly underestimate the tolerance of an average user who barely knows their way around a web browser and Word.
- Comment on fossil fuels 3 weeks ago:
NY–LA via Amtrak: $291. Greyhound, a bus company: $139
- Comment on fossil fuels 3 weeks ago:
Why not both? Companies that peel bananas and wrap them in plastic for sale are garbage companies. And people who buy them are garbare people.
- Comment on Biology 3 weeks ago:
The guy who was too lazy to clean his dishes before he went on vacation isn’t the best example of a biologist. You know, Pasteur and Koch existed, too.
- Comment on The Eurobean Mind Cannot Comprehend 3 weeks ago:
It’s conceivable as an adventure trip or if a Portuguese wanted to see Northern lights. But I guess the trip NY–LA is way more common.
The States’ population centers are on the far edges of the continent. That’s not the case in Europe, where they’re more evenly distributed.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
I’m not sure which meaning of ‘should be voided’ you’re using. Do you mean ‘Why do think it’s legal to void it’ or ‘Why do you think it’s legitimate to be able to void it’?
In the first case: My employment contract does exactly this. It’s become kind of a default clause in contracts.
In the second case: I didn’t say I thought it legitimate, and I don’t have a strong opinion on this.
- Comment on fossil fuels 3 weeks ago:
You have control over whether you eat pork or tofu, don’t you? You have control over whether you buy a new iPhone or a used FairPhone, don’t you? You have control over whether you plan a trip via airplane or via train, don’t you?
- Comment on Biology 3 weeks ago:
My respect for biologist vanished after I compared the posters the chemist had on their floor with the biologists’.
Chemist: We found a new material that can replace the <can’t remember anymore> and cut carbon emissions in half.
Biologists: Hey, we found a plant.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
I mean dude you’re defending Meta, arguably the single worst company when it comes to respecting user data and privacy
That’s argumentum ad hominem. If the law means what you think it means, it applies whether we’re talking about EvilCorp or SaveTheWhaleChildrenBeeFluff.
Also recall the very first thing I said on this topic:
I’m all for GDPR and really enjoy its protections, but I don’t understand this one.
I’m playing devil’s advocate in order to gain insight, because I have no clue how this board reaches its conclusions.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
I can’t find the word ‘unbiased’ in the GDPR. All it asks for is consent:
- Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies:
a) the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data for one or more specific purposes;
In the case of facebook, the user gives consent for the purpose of being served targeted advertising in exchange for the provided service.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
Are there any rights you think should supersede contracts? If so, how do you draw the line between rights that do and don’t?
(I’ll answer your question in a comment side-chain, just because you asked.)
Germans have the right to continued wage payments if they need to take care of family members (§616 BGB). However, that right can be voided in the employment contract.
(§618 BGB) essentially states that the work environment must be reasonably safe. This cannot be voided by contract, as is codified in (§619 BGB).
These are just instances. I do not know any general rules for the precedence of contracts over the law or vice versa.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
Are there any rights you think should supersede contracts?
That is beside the point I’m making. Facebook acknowledges the right to privacy by giving you the choice to pay for the service rather than giving up your data. In my view, this should be completely acceptable by the GDPR. No-one is forcing you to sign up to facebook, so you do have a completely free choice to (1) either not give up your data and not use facebook; or (2) not give up your data and pay for the service; or (3) give up your data and pay for the service that way.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
You have the right to not own a car. But if you do, you must have insurance for it (in Germany, at least). You cannot hide behind GDPR and say “I have a right to my data. I must not be asked to give it to any insurer without my consent.” You also need to have a driver’s license with your name and photo on it. GDPR doesn’t protect you there, either.
The bottom line is: Using a product may come with responsibilities or other concessions. You have the right to not use the product if the concessions aren’t worth it to you. You do not have the right to any product if you refuse the obligations that come with it.
This is, of course, my own opinion based on my understanding of how the world should work.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
If I understand you correctly, you’re making the same argument as !snooggums@midwest.social above, so I’ll copy answer to them here:
That is a completely different issue. On the one hand, meta does collect data on people who do not have an account. This is simply illegal, since that collection is neither necessary nor consented to. The EU should finally put a stop to that.
On the other hand we have the voluntary relationship a user enters with facebook by creating an account. This is what the article is about and what I was referring to in my comment – the “binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising”
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
Suppose non-targeted ads didn’t generate enough revenue. Would it then be legitimate to require facebook to provide their service at a loss?
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
This is lemmy. Any valid argument is shat out by the devil himself if it might be construed to support the perceived “strong one” in a relationship.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
That is a completely different issue. On the one hand, meta does collect data on people who do not have an account. This is simply illegal, since that collection is neither necessary nor consented to. The EU should finally put a stop to that.
On the other hand we have the voluntary relationship a user enters with facebook by creating an account. This is what the article is about and what I was referring to in my comment – the “binary choice between paying for a service and consenting to their personal data being used to provide targeted advertising”
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
The do charge €10/mo like every other company does, and they add the possibility to not pay and rather see targeted advertisement. How is that worse?
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
You’re framing this as if a facebook account were mandatory. If you can’t afford $10 per month, don’t use facebook. I don’t.
- Comment on EU tells Meta it can't paywall privacy 3 weeks ago:
I’m all for GDPR and really enjoy its protections, but I don’t understand this one. If facebook says they need €10/mo to provide their services and gives us the choice to either pay that or to pay with targeted ads, then how does that infringe upon our data integrity? The service seems to be worth something, so the EU cannot expect facebook to just give it out for less, can they? What’s the basis for this?
- Comment on teachings 3 weeks ago:
This was very clear. Now that I see it, I realize it’s the same reasoning why x^(-3) is 1/(x^3):
2 × -3 = -6 1 × -3 = -3 0 × -3 = 0 -1 × -3 = +3
- Comment on teachings 3 weeks ago:
This only every got handed down to us as gospel. Is there a compelling reason why we should accept that (-3) × (-3) = 9?
- Comment on Progress! 3 weeks ago:
Yes, I do. In this case I think it’s vital to link to the source, since the meme make it look like this garbage was a real thing.