merijnv
Joined 17 years ago
Joined 17 years ago
Swiftkey just lets me auto-complete/swipe in multiple languages seamlessly. Want to swipe 1 English word inside a completely Dutch sentence? No problem. The reverse? No problem. Using Google's keyboard the same way is endlessly frustrating.
Spotify's recommendation system is much better than youtube's (at least for me). I frequently "joke" that it is one of the few applications of ML that actively make my life as a consumer better.
Having been following Spotify's "Discover Weekly" for several years now, I'm actually really impressed how it manages to blend my long-term taste with recent moods. If I've been listening to one type of music for 1 or 2 weeks, there will be a noticeable uptick of it in the recommendations, while still mixing in less recent tastes.
So, yes you can ;)
It's a historical quirk on linux, where there is no clear separation between "base OS packages" and "3rd party packages".
On FreeBSD the split is very real, anything in /bin/ ships with my OS and is maintained and updated by the FreeBSD team. Anything in /usr/bin/ comes from ports and is thus a 3rd party package I installed and can be safely nuked and I need to maintain/update it.
Business outside the EU, interacting with users in the EU are bound by the GDPR. There might not really be a way (currently) to impose penalties on those businesses for violations, but they are certainly bound by them.
Keep in mind that large parts of the GDPR were already law in many EU countries, meaning there's years worth of enforcement activity that you can lookup to see how similar laws were enforced.
And mostly that has not been "handing out the biggest fines possible" and more "fines scaled to how grossly you violate the regulation". Companies who try their best to follow the law, have good processes and respond promptly, get a slap on the wrist or even just a warning if they remedy the issue fast. Companies that blatantly violate the law and stonewalling regulators get the harsh fines.
That actually depends on how your GC is implemented. For example, due to laziness+immutability, Haskell produces a lot of garbage and a lot of allocations. This is not a problem with the GHC compiler, as the GC design makes allocation cheap (effectively a bump pointer allocator) and GC cost scales with the amount of non-garbage (this is, like all GC design, is a trade-off that can get you into trouble with some workloads).
Nope, that'd be the "contract" basis (i.e. this information is strictly necessary for the user's intended task).
Legitimate interest is for non-essential data that it is, somehow, in the user's best interest to gather. But convincing a judge of that data being in the user's best interest is a...tricky bar to clear.
Well, not really. Booking didn't get fined over security practices. They got fined over not notifying of a breach of their users data within 72 hours.
So you're not really "responsible for users' security practices", you're "responsible for notifying users/authorities in time when you notice leaks/breaches". Seems rather different to me.
Why is it not GDPR compliant. You do not need consent under the GDPR. You need a (documented) "lawful basis for processing" personal information. Consent is just one of several lawful bases and honestly it's the most useless one, if you need consent your business model is screwed. It's perfectly possible for GitHub to process personal information without explicit consent while not violating the GDPR. Several options come to mind:
1) consider analytics part of the "contract legal" basis, arguing that analytics to improve the usability of the website is a fundamental part of running a website.
2) The "legitimate interest" lawful basis, which states:
> processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child.
Arguing that improving the accessibility/usability is in the legitimate interest of both company and user.
I'm fairly confident that, depending on which and what detail of personal information, both of these justifications will be accepted by EU courts.
It's perfectly possible for GitHub to process personal information without explicit consent while not violating the GDPR. Several options come to mind:
1) consider analytics part of the "contract legal" basis, arguing that analytics to improve the usability of the website is a fundamental part of running a website.
2) The "legitimate interest" lawful basis, which states:
> processing is necessary for the purposes of the legitimate interests pursued by the controller or by a third party, except where such interests are overridden by the interests or fundamental rights and freedoms of the data subject which require protection of personal data, in particular where the data subject is a child.
Arguing that improving the accessibility/usability is in the legitimate interest of both company and user.
I'm fairly confident that, depending on which and what detail of personal information, both of these justifications will be accepted by EU courts.