I seriously doubt you are an expert on GDPR compliance. I'm not an expert either, but I manage the CRM of a US financial institution with EU clients and there is guidance on how to deal with these kinds of issues. Such advice is beyond the scope of a Slashdot post, but look into concepts such as data minimisation and purpose limitation if you are actually curious. In short, if you can show a good reason why you need to keep data and minimize your data to only keep what you need, you will get some latitude when it comes to your ability to store some personal information about your customers. Doing so for tax purposes is one of those good reasons to keep data.
So if your web site has a stock photo of a woman on it and she is not in a burka the Saudis have a right to chop your head off if one Saudi national visits your web site? And your inane idea is "+5, Insightful"?
Wow. Just wow.
If your country has an extradition treaty where they will send you to a country that will execute you for this kind of infraction then you have plenty of problems in your own country.
But in the spirit of your hyperbole laden question, yes a foreign country should have the ability to create whatever arrest warrants it wants even if it doesn't like the way you jaywalk in your own country. It is up to you to determine if you want to visit that country or any country which would arrest you and extradite you to that country, and up to your government's treaties and state department to determine if they will uphold that country's ridiculous laws.
If your country doesn't like the laws of another country, you can try to enact sanctions or even invade if you wish, but otherwise honor their right to make their own laws. You don't have to follow them if you don't want to, but you may have trouble visiting that country (and their allies) or extracting payment from their citizens if you ignore their laws.
None of them are a problem to the average store. Most have already finished implementing it, I recently got a flood of emails from stores I used ages ago, telling me that they'd be really sorry to lose me as a customer but they are going to delete my data now if I don't (click here) to tell them I'm still interested in staying with them.
I didn't say they were hard to implement, just that your statement was inaccurate.
Have you even bothered to take a look at the law? We're not talking about a company asking for your name and mail address so they can deliver a box with shit you buy in it. You take that information, you store it, you don't distribute it, you're golden.
Once you start selling it, you're in deep shit. As you effin' should be!
There are plenty of GDPR laws regarding how you store and eventually purge customer data even if you don't sell it.
I run a website with worldwide audience. I've also never been to Europe. Tell me why I should comply or face fines to a jurisdiction I've never been to?
You are servicing their citizens while they reside in their country, so you should follow their laws. Just because the Internet makes it so easy to reach those customers doesn't mean you should be able to ignore their laws.
It's almost as if [access to people's email inboxes in order to data-mine the contents for competitive intelligence is] exactly the sort of undisclosed behavior the GDPR is designed to combat...
I don't think it is. The GDPR is specifically interested in personal information, not non-personal information such as commercial or transactional messages. As long as the data is sufficiently anonymized (something I'm sure the courts will further define over the next decade or so) I would think companies like Unroll.me could continue that part of their business model even with the GDPR.
There are likely other aspects of Unroll.me's business model which are causing them to cut off EU customers, not their practice of reading customers' emails and selling aggregate data collected from them.
Most US companies find it more profitable to hire illegal immigrants than comply. What else is new?
That isn't the same as this situation at all. Companies which use services like this are not breaking the law by not complying, they are mearly making sure their business model and customer base does not require them to comply. It would be like companies moving their operations to Mexico where the workers aren't illegals.
That clearly says they will collect non-personal information. It says nothing about how they will use or disclose (i.e. sell) that information.
I would hope that would be obvious, but since you think it isn't here is some information from the very next paragraph of their privacy policy:
We may collect and use your commercial transactional messages and associated data to build anonymous market research products and services with trusted business partners. If we combine non-personal information with personal information, the combined information will be treated as personal information for as long as it remains combined.
I present to you a visual guide of how hard it is to read all the T&Cs today
https://i.imgur.com/5LphAGP.jpg
I doubt that is an image of Unroll.me's privacy policy, since their document is about 6 pages long with significant white space and a Calibri 11 point font. Page 1 has their policy on collection of personal information, and page 2 has the text I listed above. If you actually care about how they collect your data, you can find everything you want under the headers Our Collection and Use of Personal Information and Our Collection and Use of Non-Personal Information, which are both about a page long.
A new service called GDPR Shield made the rounds last week and for all the wrong reasons. The service, advertised as a piece of JavaScript that webmasters embed on their sites, blocks EU-based users from accessing a website, just so the parent company won't have to deal with GDPR compliance.
This is just the type of service you would hope exists to make sure citizens can decide what levels of privacy they want and companies can decide what level of privacy they are willing to provide. For some time now we will see many stories of companies improving their privacy, companies pulling out of the EU market, and companies being fined by the EU. All are good and expected outcomes of rules such as the GDPR.
Why is anyone still using the service after they got caught lying?
I didn't see any mention of Unroll.me lying to their customers. They are a free service, so they are going to make money off of their customers' data. If you are curious about how, you go read their Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. This is from their Privacy Policy before details of their business model went public:
We also collect non-personal information - data in a form that does not permit direct association with any specific individual... For example, when you use our services, we may collect data from and about the "commercial electronic mail messages" and "transactional or relationship messages" (as such terms are defined in the CAN-SPAM Act (15 U.S.C. 7702 et. seq.) that are sent to your email accounts.
This clearly states they will look at advertisements (commercial electronic mail message) and receipts / order updates ("transactional or relationship messages) in your inbox in order collect data to sell to 3rd parties. So where were they lying? You may not like their business model but don't accuse them of doing things they didn't do.
This is unlikely, since we all know from comments on Slashdot that the US is a third world hellhole no one would want to even visit, much less live in. Surely they meant they fled to Europe, which as we all know is a welcoming, enlightened place for humans to live in peace and harmony.
They are leaving for the coastal area of California, which has little in common with most of the US. It even has little in common with the non-coastal areas of California.
It doesn't work that way, what you're hoping for is still sci-fi.
That is why the title said Biology will be the next big computing platform, not that it already is. But CRISPR does appear to be the type of advance which changes what we think of as possible. It certainly is affecting the amount of R&D spending invested in this industry.
Damn right. If you are fat, dumb, slow, short, near-sighted, a high cancer risk, etc. then your kids better damn well be cursed with the same afflictions. Only those lucky enough to be born beautiful, healthy, and smart should have beautiful, healthy, and smart babies. As God intended.
It's rather silly to expect homeowners to pay the tax rates of a multinational hotel chain to rent out their home or apartment for a couple of months while they go on a cruise or something
Why is that silly? Platforms such as AirBnB would simply take the taxes out of the rental income and assist with the filings (if they don't want to lose their clients that is). Now you have hotels and AirBnB operating on a level playing field.
Instead they are forced out and replaced with workers who can demand higher wages due to skills/experience. And then they cycle repeats.This is bad for everyone.
How is this bad for everyone? You seem to have described a self-repairing cycle that works quite well.
How does anything in your long post detract from the evidence that economic anxiety of white Americans as they lose their cultural dominance was a major factor in Trump's election victory? You seem to only bolster this theory. One of the articles you linked to makes an odd argument that economic anxiety and cultural anxiety are inherently different. One primary source of white American economic anxiety is the loss of their cultural dominance which fuels white privilege.
The "muslim ban" countries are those that do not effectively cooperate with background checks necessary to grant a visa. That's all.
Sounds like a fine excuse which could fly with Trump's base, but certainly no free thinking person would fall for it. 11% of foreign-born people who committed or were convicted of attempting to commit a terrorist attack on U.S. soil from 1975 through 2015 came from one of the banned countries, and 0% of deaths from terrorist activities over that 40 year period came from these countries. Two of the banned countries have had 0 convicted terrorists on US soil in the past 40 years.
If these countries are not effectively cooperating with US background checks, but yet still have results like this, it is our background checks which are too onerous. If it was easier to get terrorists from these countries to immigrate into the US for the purpose of terrorist attacks because of lax background check capabilities, certainly no terrorist organization has figured out how to exploit it.
Use your own brain. No one with a positive IQ should fall for the Trump administration's proposed reasons for this ban. He may be able to get the ban through the Supreme Court based on an inconsistently strict partisan reading of the law, but even those justices won't be fooled by the actual reason for the ban.
The anxiety of the stereotypical "Trump voter" is not coming from those in poverty / near-poverty for the most part. Those people get by and re-enter the workforce in large part because of safety nets championed by Democrats. Trump voters on the other hand are more likely to to have decent working class and middle class jobs they are afraid of losing. And these jobs tend to provide household incomes above $50k/yr. When you combine Trump voters with the rest of Republican voters you find that less than a third of those who voted for Trump were in the working class or lower.
Only a small fraction of people who voted for Trump are included in the what politicians consider "Trump voters". The rest were simply traditional Republicans. But these additional Trump voters are the ones that got him elected since they included so many independent voters. When people discuss the trends which helped Trump win they aren't talking about everyone who voted for Trump, just the ones who swung the election. So your statistics about the demographics of all voters who voted for Trump and Clinton show us nothing about the factors which led to his victory.
Because - hype notwithstanding - the competition is a joke.
While I think Tesla stock is overvalued, I generally agree with you that it is still a solid company with a lot of promise. But don't get confused into thinking Tesla's only competition is other EVs. Plenty of people, myself included, still compare Tesla to BMW, Lexus, Mercedes Benz, etc. when making a car purchase. Being an EV is a factor but for many people it isn't the largest factor driving the purchase.
For instance the Tesla 3 has plenty of competition from cars like BMW 4 series, the Audi S4, and similar models from nearly every other luxury car manufacturer. Each of the two models will outperform the high end Tesla 3 and cost less (although with the nearly expired rebate the Tesla 3 is cheaper). The Tesla 3 is slightly cheaper over a 5 year period based on fuel costs, assuming 10k+ miles per year, but not by much. And while the 0-60 times are comparable for these vehicles (with BMW 440 & Audi S4 both beating the Tesla 3), if the Tesla 3 is like the Tesla S the handling won't be quite as good because of the extra weight.
The Tesla vehicles are still great, and I was in line day one to put down a deposit on the Tesla 3. But I eventually went with a used BMW 435i. Tesla has plenty of competition today and will have far more over the next decade. As long as they keep making great cars they will be able to compete, but Tesla isn't blowing anyone out of the water. My guess is the Gigafactory is the most valuable part of the company.
No, it isn't an open question. A human will be able to discern a non-human with 100% accuracy (so far).
Well that certainly isn't true. My father didn't know Tarkin was a CGI character when he first watched Rogue One. Most people could tell but certainly not 100%.
but when a human plays drastically better than their rating, the cheating is pretty obvious.
So the next task should be to create a bot where you can set a target rating that it will play at. Then you can slowly move up the ranks to simulate your play improving over time.
You're making the mistake of thinking that a person in your age group should interview. I'll imagine that you're at least 35+ possibly even as high as 50. We don't interview at that age anymore.
That isn't my experience when job hunting. My last two roles came from recruiters / partners contacting me, but I still needed to interview. Last time I actively job searched it was a combination of companies whose recruiters contacted me and openings I found through my network. In every case if it went past a basic screening and I felt they had the necessary budget for my salary expectations, there were still interviews. For the four companies where it progressed to interviews, I interviewed with at least three people at each (one I interviewed with 10 people in 3 panel interviews). Even my previous company when one of the co-owners sought me out for the position, I was interviewed by his partner and one other senior staff member before being given the position.
I am in the 35-40 age range and all of these roles were for Solution Principal, Development Manager, or Technical Architect positions, so they weren't entry level. I'm sure there are plenty of employers who don't care about resumes and hire purely based on recommendations or Github work, but I sincerely doubt they are the norm. I haven't run into one of these companies yet anyway.
I would say that by your 30's you probably shouldn't be posting your resume to job boards and HR portals and just hoping for an email response or call. But that is far from saying you should expect to not interview for roles at any level of seniority. My current company just finished interviewing three candidates for our COO position (three that I know of, maybe more).
Slashdot Mirror
And yet my country requires that I keep all that information for a minimum of 7 years. So it seems a lot simpler to just cut off any and all sales to the EU.
I seriously doubt you are an expert on GDPR compliance. I'm not an expert either, but I manage the CRM of a US financial institution with EU clients and there is guidance on how to deal with these kinds of issues. Such advice is beyond the scope of a Slashdot post, but look into concepts such as data minimisation and purpose limitation if you are actually curious. In short, if you can show a good reason why you need to keep data and minimize your data to only keep what you need, you will get some latitude when it comes to your ability to store some personal information about your customers. Doing so for tax purposes is one of those good reasons to keep data.
So if your web site has a stock photo of a woman on it and she is not in a burka the Saudis have a right to chop your head off if one Saudi national visits your web site? And your inane idea is "+5, Insightful"?
Wow. Just wow.
If your country has an extradition treaty where they will send you to a country that will execute you for this kind of infraction then you have plenty of problems in your own country.
But in the spirit of your hyperbole laden question, yes a foreign country should have the ability to create whatever arrest warrants it wants even if it doesn't like the way you jaywalk in your own country. It is up to you to determine if you want to visit that country or any country which would arrest you and extradite you to that country, and up to your government's treaties and state department to determine if they will uphold that country's ridiculous laws.
If your country doesn't like the laws of another country, you can try to enact sanctions or even invade if you wish, but otherwise honor their right to make their own laws. You don't have to follow them if you don't want to, but you may have trouble visiting that country (and their allies) or extracting payment from their citizens if you ignore their laws.
None of them are a problem to the average store. Most have already finished implementing it, I recently got a flood of emails from stores I used ages ago, telling me that they'd be really sorry to lose me as a customer but they are going to delete my data now if I don't (click here) to tell them I'm still interested in staying with them.
I didn't say they were hard to implement, just that your statement was inaccurate.
Have you even bothered to take a look at the law? We're not talking about a company asking for your name and mail address so they can deliver a box with shit you buy in it. You take that information, you store it, you don't distribute it, you're golden.
Once you start selling it, you're in deep shit. As you effin' should be!
There are plenty of GDPR laws regarding how you store and eventually purge customer data even if you don't sell it.
I run a website with worldwide audience. I've also never been to Europe. Tell me why I should comply or face fines to a jurisdiction I've never been to?
You are servicing their citizens while they reside in their country, so you should follow their laws. Just because the Internet makes it so easy to reach those customers doesn't mean you should be able to ignore their laws.
It's almost as if [access to people's email inboxes in order to data-mine the contents for competitive intelligence is] exactly the sort of undisclosed behavior the GDPR is designed to combat...
I don't think it is. The GDPR is specifically interested in personal information, not non-personal information such as commercial or transactional messages. As long as the data is sufficiently anonymized (something I'm sure the courts will further define over the next decade or so) I would think companies like Unroll.me could continue that part of their business model even with the GDPR.
There are likely other aspects of Unroll.me's business model which are causing them to cut off EU customers, not their practice of reading customers' emails and selling aggregate data collected from them.
Most US companies find it more profitable to hire illegal immigrants than comply. What else is new?
That isn't the same as this situation at all. Companies which use services like this are not breaking the law by not complying, they are mearly making sure their business model and customer base does not require them to comply. It would be like companies moving their operations to Mexico where the workers aren't illegals.
That clearly says they will collect non-personal information. It says nothing about how they will use or disclose (i.e. sell) that information.
I would hope that would be obvious, but since you think it isn't here is some information from the very next paragraph of their privacy policy:
We may collect and use your commercial transactional messages and associated data to build anonymous market research products and services with trusted business partners. If we combine non-personal information with personal information, the combined information will be treated as personal information for as long as it remains combined.
I present to you a visual guide of how hard it is to read all the T&Cs today
https://i.imgur.com/5LphAGP.jpg
I doubt that is an image of Unroll.me's privacy policy, since their document is about 6 pages long with significant white space and a Calibri 11 point font. Page 1 has their policy on collection of personal information, and page 2 has the text I listed above. If you actually care about how they collect your data, you can find everything you want under the headers Our Collection and Use of Personal Information and Our Collection and Use of Non-Personal Information, which are both about a page long.
A new service called GDPR Shield made the rounds last week and for all the wrong reasons. The service, advertised as a piece of JavaScript that webmasters embed on their sites, blocks EU-based users from accessing a website, just so the parent company won't have to deal with GDPR compliance.
This is just the type of service you would hope exists to make sure citizens can decide what levels of privacy they want and companies can decide what level of privacy they are willing to provide. For some time now we will see many stories of companies improving their privacy, companies pulling out of the EU market, and companies being fined by the EU. All are good and expected outcomes of rules such as the GDPR.
Why is anyone still using the service after they got caught lying?
I didn't see any mention of Unroll.me lying to their customers. They are a free service, so they are going to make money off of their customers' data. If you are curious about how, you go read their Terms of Use and Privacy Policy. This is from their Privacy Policy before details of their business model went public:
We also collect non-personal information - data in a form that does not permit direct association with any specific individual ... For example, when you use our services, we may collect data from and about the "commercial electronic mail messages" and "transactional or relationship messages" (as such terms are defined in the CAN-SPAM Act (15 U.S.C. 7702 et. seq.) that are sent to your email accounts.
This clearly states they will look at advertisements (commercial electronic mail message) and receipts / order updates ("transactional or relationship messages) in your inbox in order collect data to sell to 3rd parties. So where were they lying? You may not like their business model but don't accuse them of doing things they didn't do.
This is unlikely, since we all know from comments on Slashdot that the US is a third world hellhole no one would want to even visit, much less live in. Surely they meant they fled to Europe, which as we all know is a welcoming, enlightened place for humans to live in peace and harmony.
They are leaving for the coastal area of California, which has little in common with most of the US. It even has little in common with the non-coastal areas of California.
It doesn't work that way, what you're hoping for is still sci-fi.
That is why the title said Biology will be the next big computing platform, not that it already is. But CRISPR does appear to be the type of advance which changes what we think of as possible. It certainly is affecting the amount of R&D spending invested in this industry.
We need a moratorium on CRISPR pronto
Damn right. If you are fat, dumb, slow, short, near-sighted, a high cancer risk, etc. then your kids better damn well be cursed with the same afflictions. Only those lucky enough to be born beautiful, healthy, and smart should have beautiful, healthy, and smart babies. As God intended.
Once everyone is tall and smart then no one will be. See how that works?
That is kind of the point. Taking away at least some of peoples' built in disadvantages that is.
It's rather silly to expect homeowners to pay the tax rates of a multinational hotel chain to rent out their home or apartment for a couple of months while they go on a cruise or something
Why is that silly? Platforms such as AirBnB would simply take the taxes out of the rental income and assist with the filings (if they don't want to lose their clients that is). Now you have hotels and AirBnB operating on a level playing field.
Instead they are forced out and replaced with workers who can demand higher wages due to skills/experience. And then they cycle repeats.This is bad for everyone.
How is this bad for everyone? You seem to have described a self-repairing cycle that works quite well.
Not enough for you? This guy summarized even more studies: Donald Trump won the GOP primary and the presidency because campaigning on whiteness-first messaging still has potency in the 21st century.
How does anything in your long post detract from the evidence that economic anxiety of white Americans as they lose their cultural dominance was a major factor in Trump's election victory? You seem to only bolster this theory. One of the articles you linked to makes an odd argument that economic anxiety and cultural anxiety are inherently different. One primary source of white American economic anxiety is the loss of their cultural dominance which fuels white privilege.
"Muslim" isn't a race any more than "Catholic" or "American", you numpty fucking cunt.
There is no such thing as race within the homo-sapien species. Racism has never been exclusively biological and has often if not primarily had cultural origins. The more we assume that race is limited to skin color, the less we understand about contemporary racism faced by Muslims at home and abroad.
Perhaps you also believe antisemitism is not racism either, or are you simply inconsistent in your beliefs on racism and race in general?
The "muslim ban" countries are those that do not effectively cooperate with background checks necessary to grant a visa. That's all.
Sounds like a fine excuse which could fly with Trump's base, but certainly no free thinking person would fall for it. 11% of foreign-born people who committed or were convicted of attempting to commit a terrorist attack on U.S. soil from 1975 through 2015 came from one of the banned countries, and 0% of deaths from terrorist activities over that 40 year period came from these countries. Two of the banned countries have had 0 convicted terrorists on US soil in the past 40 years.
If these countries are not effectively cooperating with US background checks, but yet still have results like this, it is our background checks which are too onerous. If it was easier to get terrorists from these countries to immigrate into the US for the purpose of terrorist attacks because of lax background check capabilities, certainly no terrorist organization has figured out how to exploit it.
Use your own brain. No one with a positive IQ should fall for the Trump administration's proposed reasons for this ban. He may be able to get the ban through the Supreme Court based on an inconsistently strict partisan reading of the law, but even those justices won't be fooled by the actual reason for the ban.
Sorry dude, its not about economic anxiety. That's just one of those fairytales we tell ourselves to avoid confronting ugly truths about our fellow citizens. The majority of people earning under $50K/yr voted for Clinton.
The anxiety of the stereotypical "Trump voter" is not coming from those in poverty / near-poverty for the most part. Those people get by and re-enter the workforce in large part because of safety nets championed by Democrats. Trump voters on the other hand are more likely to to have decent working class and middle class jobs they are afraid of losing. And these jobs tend to provide household incomes above $50k/yr. When you combine Trump voters with the rest of Republican voters you find that less than a third of those who voted for Trump were in the working class or lower.
Only a small fraction of people who voted for Trump are included in the what politicians consider "Trump voters". The rest were simply traditional Republicans. But these additional Trump voters are the ones that got him elected since they included so many independent voters. When people discuss the trends which helped Trump win they aren't talking about everyone who voted for Trump, just the ones who swung the election. So your statistics about the demographics of all voters who voted for Trump and Clinton show us nothing about the factors which led to his victory.
Because - hype notwithstanding - the competition is a joke.
While I think Tesla stock is overvalued, I generally agree with you that it is still a solid company with a lot of promise. But don't get confused into thinking Tesla's only competition is other EVs. Plenty of people, myself included, still compare Tesla to BMW, Lexus, Mercedes Benz, etc. when making a car purchase. Being an EV is a factor but for many people it isn't the largest factor driving the purchase.
For instance the Tesla 3 has plenty of competition from cars like BMW 4 series, the Audi S4, and similar models from nearly every other luxury car manufacturer. Each of the two models will outperform the high end Tesla 3 and cost less (although with the nearly expired rebate the Tesla 3 is cheaper). The Tesla 3 is slightly cheaper over a 5 year period based on fuel costs, assuming 10k+ miles per year, but not by much. And while the 0-60 times are comparable for these vehicles (with BMW 440 & Audi S4 both beating the Tesla 3), if the Tesla 3 is like the Tesla S the handling won't be quite as good because of the extra weight.
The Tesla vehicles are still great, and I was in line day one to put down a deposit on the Tesla 3. But I eventually went with a used BMW 435i. Tesla has plenty of competition today and will have far more over the next decade. As long as they keep making great cars they will be able to compete, but Tesla isn't blowing anyone out of the water. My guess is the Gigafactory is the most valuable part of the company.
No, it isn't an open question. A human will be able to discern a non-human with 100% accuracy (so far).
Well that certainly isn't true. My father didn't know Tarkin was a CGI character when he first watched Rogue One. Most people could tell but certainly not 100%.
but when a human plays drastically better than their rating, the cheating is pretty obvious.
So the next task should be to create a bot where you can set a target rating that it will play at. Then you can slowly move up the ranks to simulate your play improving over time.
You're making the mistake of thinking that a person in your age group should interview. I'll imagine that you're at least 35+ possibly even as high as 50. We don't interview at that age anymore.
That isn't my experience when job hunting. My last two roles came from recruiters / partners contacting me, but I still needed to interview. Last time I actively job searched it was a combination of companies whose recruiters contacted me and openings I found through my network. In every case if it went past a basic screening and I felt they had the necessary budget for my salary expectations, there were still interviews. For the four companies where it progressed to interviews, I interviewed with at least three people at each (one I interviewed with 10 people in 3 panel interviews). Even my previous company when one of the co-owners sought me out for the position, I was interviewed by his partner and one other senior staff member before being given the position.
I am in the 35-40 age range and all of these roles were for Solution Principal, Development Manager, or Technical Architect positions, so they weren't entry level. I'm sure there are plenty of employers who don't care about resumes and hire purely based on recommendations or Github work, but I sincerely doubt they are the norm. I haven't run into one of these companies yet anyway.
I would say that by your 30's you probably shouldn't be posting your resume to job boards and HR portals and just hoping for an email response or call. But that is far from saying you should expect to not interview for roles at any level of seniority. My current company just finished interviewing three candidates for our COO position (three that I know of, maybe more).