zalyalov

I see a lot of comments about how it is some sort of an unforeseen second-order consequence. But it isn't. If you want to have no tracking, you write a law that nans tracking. If you write a law about mandatory notifications, bombardment of notifications is the most direct consequence one can imagine.

Yes, that very much is an example of the law being badly written.

"Prior to giving consent, the data subject shall be informed thereof."

Means there must be some sort of a cookie notification (which could of course take a small space of the screen, but still).

The existence of this notification makes it easier to initially give consent. If withdrawing later is to be as easy, the notification must never disappear.

  struct S {
    int A;
    int B = A;
    int C;
  };

  int i = 0;
  S s = {.C = i++, .A = ++i};

What would you expect code like this to do?

Weird that they claim to use arbitrary graphs, while in reality it's a weird subclass of DAGs with one-vertex loops kind of allowed, except they don't really make sense to be represented as loops.

What do you mean by sound? Mathematically sound means "there exists a model validating it", and of course it exists, but so what? If you mean you can bound the probability of error, then in your formulation you actually can't.

That... that way to handle leap years can't possibly be right, can it? It doesn't account that you don't need to add the leap day of the current year if the day is before Feb 29

>allow access and/or use of any open-source code to humans only;

That would be the most hilarious outcome possible. Oops, you can't store open source code on your computer, the access is only for humans!

Um, is SMS not tied to not losing a particular SIM card? I guess you can try to restore your number, do all operators provide this functionality?