- 0 Posts
- 17 Comments
Taking this claim specifically:
No they let you opt out of sharing data with the hundreds 3rd parties they share your data with…by clicking reject next to each of their names on another page…
Hidden options are not “informed consent that is freely given”.
7·4 days agoI got very confused about the reported time scale. “week-long protests”, quoting the minister with “10 days”. Pretty sure I’ve seen reporting on the cockroach movement and protests between two to six weeks ago.
Later in the article the timespan gets mixed up.
Sonam Wangchuk, the renowned Indian engineer and activist who had galvanised the movement as he went on a 26-day hunger strike, celebrated the “victory of democracy, straight from the streets”.
For weeks, the Modi government had ignored the CJP protesters, but as support grew into ahuge mass movement this week, the government agreed to have a dialogue.
The 2026 Delhi Jantar Mantar protests, also referred to as the Indian Gen Z protests[13][14] and the Cockroach protests,[15][16] were a series of demonstrations initiated on 6 June 2026 by the Cockroach Janta Party (CJP),
I read it as it costs money to take the the exam. So in that sentence 1. pay tutor 2. pay for exam.
3·4 days agoYou think/Are you saying they’re late because of the layoffs? Or is that the norm for Oracle?
Yeah, the article framing is misleading. The title specifically.
Sane regulation. You like to see it.
$7 billion required collateral. , $100 million annually, $15 billion
Oracle’s argument of “this investment is worth $15 billion” is not only entirely besides the point, which the regulating government office rightfully refuses, but "‘worth’ in your state or city is entirely pointless if it incurs not that amount of local public gain but only public cost. It’s a stupid, misleading argument.
I’m really interested in what that 21k employee loss mean in practice. In a hype-craze it’s probably not sane restructuring and letting go of unneeded personal and inefficiencies, I assume.
As it often is, the source has more information, and significantly so. I also find it much easier and more informative to read. Simple direct speech, headlines, more concrete on what is exposed, more technical details, etc.
They didn’t just send one email to report the vulnerability.
and on January 3rd I emailed nine people: the general info address, six individual staff members at clicktopray.org, and two contacts at popesprayer.va (the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network). No response. From any of them.
For July they have three entries of ‘reported to Journalist’ (“Dark Reading”), journalist contacted the Pope’s Worldwide Prayer Network, and ‘still no response’.
They also posted an update about it being fixed on 2026-07-24 that it has been fixed.
The authorization check is there now: request your own user ID and you still get your email back, request someone else’s and you get a public profile. Names are supposed to be public on a platform where you pray alongside other people, so what’s left is what was always meant to be visible.
I also never got an email. Not an acknowledgment, not a thank you, not a “we’ve addressed this.”
Given that The Register posted this article on 2026-07-24 22 UTC it must have been very unfortunate timing. Presumably they didn’t check the source again before pressing publish? And also haven’t noticed or bothered to include an information update.
I thought they were known for keeping things under the rug/hidden. Only priest’s not follower’s personal data I guess.
From the source blog post, which has the update
The authorization check is there now: request your own user ID and you still get your email back, request someone else’s and you get a public profile. Names are supposed to be public on a platform where you pray alongside other people, so what’s left is what was always meant to be visible.
If sinners go to hell, do you even have to do due diligence? Let us pray for the vulnerability to disappear.
Damn, with that many people praying these prayers are about to get real effective. I’m surprised we haven’t heard of their effects and effectiveness yet.
- 31^6=887.503.681
- 31^7=27.512.614.111
deleted by creator
They drove up and didn’t check/verify the plate before engaging? That seems stupid and lacking responsibility.
What was it, two cop cars? Then I assume four cops? Always makes me wonder if the engagement is in a warranted amount. I assume it’s the norm in the US, maybe it’s necessary for “stolen car”, although I’m skeptical, and it certainly makes it worse for the falsely accused exposed to it. And it makes the lack of verification, making it not just a flock false positive but an engagement false positive, victimizing civilians, worse.
It probably is legal and if you follow the money I’m willing to be there is some lobbying form who argued to get a provision like this snuck into GDPR during some backroom deal.
No, it’s not legal.
Seems like you’re making stuff up to match your broad views instead of checking or reading wherever. Which would be one thing if it’s just for your own views, but you’re unjustly propagating misinformation and system distrust.
https://gdpr-info.eu/art-21-gdpr/
At the latest at the time of the first communication with the data subject, the right referred to in paragraphs 1 and 2 shall be explicitly brought to the attention of the data subject and shall be presented clearly and separately from any other information.
https://gdpr-info.eu/art-25-gdpr/
1The controller shall implement appropriate technical and organisational measures for ensuring that, by default, only personal data which are necessary for each specific purpose of the processing are processed. 2That obligation applies to the amount of personal data collected, the extent of their processing, the period of their storage and their accessibility. 3In particular, such measures shall ensure that by default personal data are not made accessible without the individual’s intervention to an indefinite number of natural persons.
More explanation what that means specifically on https://gdpr-info.eu/issues/consent/
Sorry if my response sounds harsh or unjustified. We’re on a public platform after all where people share their views and understanding. It just pains me to read misinformation on such a good thing amongst less good things.
Regarding the subscription or consent choice I’ve read multiple times that it was ruled illegal. I’m confused why is still practiced.
Sugar labels on food didn’t stop their sales 🤷
I don’t see it. Disclosure is always a good thing.
Some people care, and they should have the option to choose. Not be misled, ignored, or lied to.
Ran out of unlimited tokens for this?
This seems to be only about the administrative branch and for unclassified information. From the title, I was thinking of the Iran operation at first.