Show more

NPM’s ceo was successfully trolled by *hand puppets*.

I’ll stop laughing about this some day, I swear.

The Chrome team is already behaving as if they own the web, railroading the process for a UI term I hadn't even heard of until an hour ago.

For some reason, I can’t really put my finger on it, all the monopolistic big-ass Internet companies are constantly telling us that the future of computing is dumb terminals using their hosted services.

See also: Google Stadia

How many times do you think this sign was stolen before they resided to stick a tracker on it?

lmao at all the free speech clowns in toots mentions. why is being able to connect to an internet nazi instance the big moral hill youre gonna die on. do you know how foolish you look doing this predictable shit every time. shut the fuck up

So Gab has decided that their own code that they spent $5M of investor money developing is so unsalvageably bad that they're going to use Mastodon's code instead, with the added bonus of leeching off of our apps (with Gab apps being banned from app stores)

This is an early warning to fellow admins to be vigilant and domain-block them on sight, when/if they appear (unconfirmed whether they intend to federate), and to app devs to consider if blocking Gab's domains from their app is necessary.

GDPR minutiae and application 

GDPR minutiae and application 

GDPR minutiae and application 

@offication @kaniini

Additionally Art 89 says "Those safeguards shall ensure that technical and organisational measures are in place in particular in order to ensure respect for the principle of data minimisation". has already established "There's no process for being part of ArchiveTeam" so no organisational measures there.

They also said "Everything that archiveteam does is public" so there are no technical measures either.

@offication @kaniini

But to engage Article 89 one must "provide for suitable and specific measures to safeguard the fundamental rights and the interests of the data subject".

"You can opt-out after the fact" would not qualify. @kaniini

Jesus. Just because something is available "publicly" doesn't mean it isn't personal data and that it doesn't need protecting.


BIG :oof:, indeed.

Also not that I did not ask if they had discussed the GDPR, I asked if they had discussed data protection. Like, at all. @kaniini

Okay then. Since you said "we", does that mean you are part of the ArchiveTeam?

And if so, have they ever discussed data protection with you? @kaniini

Then I suggest you read Article 4(1) and (2) of the GDPR and re-think what you just said. @kaniini

Holy shit you're processing personal data and you don't know what that means?

Go read Article 6 of the General Data Protection Regulation. @kaniini What is the legal basis under which you are processing the personal data?

@kaniini GDPR, if you're in the EU/EEA, would also help here.

Show more

My home on the Fediverse.