Obviously acquiring publicly available data is legal
Under the EU GDPR it is often not legal. Controllers need a legal basis, which only exists if there is an appropriate relationship between the controller and the data subject.
Obviously acquiring publicly available data is legal
Under the EU GDPR it is often not legal. Controllers need a legal basis, which only exists if there is an appropriate relationship between the controller and the data subject.
No, you got downvoted because you were insulting and incorrect.
RCS is walled off by design, so that users are dependent on Google and their phone carrier. If they wanted an open standard they would have adopted something like XMPP.
The uMatrix add-on for Firefox seems to do what you want.
Do you have experience with Spanish employment law?
You can’t just compare the file sizes without looking at the quality. Each will have different quality loss depending on the exact encodings used.
Key servers can be dishonest, so you need to have another way of verifying that the key you receive is correct.
This is fake
Yes, it is generally a good idea to put internet-facing servers on a network that is separated from the local network. The point of this is not to minimize their attack surface (since they are already connected to the internet after all) but to prevent them from being used as a stepping stone for attacks on your internal network. To make this effective, you should block traffic from the internet-facing network to the rest of your network and treat it as potentially untrusted.
“Gen Z simply uses technology more than any other generation and is therefore more likely to be scammed via that technology.”
raid is essential anyway
Why? If there are offsite backups that can be restored in an acceptable time frame, what’s still the point of RAID?
It seems like this order is rather limited and the IA can continue almost all of their work.
If you turn the fan up high enough it will blow the heat from outside into the house. Trust me, I’m a scientists.
Applying AI-voodoo to a non-existing problem with unknown side effects? Sign me up!
It’s not. Image hosting sites have existed for decades. Websites are not liable unless they have actual knowledge of illegal content and ignore takedown requests. Stop fearmongering.
Good. Hopefully this will discourage people from using Clownflare’s DNS.
In case you don’t know, Cloudflare already controls a massive amount of websites, have access to their unencrypted traffic and are making the web inaccessible for people who use tor or noscript. They are a threat to the open web.
Communication network providers in the EU generally aren’t liable for illegal activity of their users.
While it’s stupid that ISPs are using their monopolies to screw consumers, the concept of data caps is not as stupid as you might think.
You’re not just paying for the connection between you and the ISP, but also all the other data links that get your internet traffic to its destination. For example, those cables across the ocean are owned third parties and they charge money for every byte that goes through. It wouldn’t be unreasonable for ISPs to pass that cost to users.
Furthermore, most links are overprovisioned in order to keep costs down. For example, if you assume that users only use 10% of their bandwidth on average, that means you can fit 10x as many people on a connection (or maybe 8x to account for peaks). This does mean that users should be discouraged from using their full bandwidth for long durations, otherwise the network operators can’t overprovision as much and have to invest more in infrastructure.
I don’t see how this is so difficult. Given the choice between a narcissistic billionaire or an independent, accountable government commission that’s bound by the rule of law, I’ll choose the latter every time.