@foone
Pretty sure they already can with the info you've just written down if they want.
Pretty sure they also don't want, because it would be embarrassing to the extreme for them to come forward after what you just wrote down 😂
Pretty sure they already can with the info you've just written down if they want.
Pretty sure they also don't want, because it would be embarrassing to the extreme for them to come forward after what you just wrote down 😂
@campuscodi
It's actually not the EU mandating that. The law only says you can't track people without their consent. There are two obvious ways out of there: either you ask consent, or... you just don't track!
Shocking, I know.
It's actually not the EU mandating that. The law only says you can't track people without their consent. There are two obvious ways out of there: either you ask consent, or... you just don't track!
Shocking, I know.
@mjg59
I wish I could say you moet obviously be mistaken, but then I realize I've seen too much incompetence in this world to honestly believe that...
I wish I could say you moet obviously be mistaken, but then I realize I've seen too much incompetence in this world to honestly believe that...
@CyrilBrulebois
A year? Try six 😞
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2011-0530
We fixed CVE-2005-3534 on the released branch and found out six years later that we forgot to also fix it on the development branch 🤦♂️
A year? Try six 😞
https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2011-0530
We fixed CVE-2005-3534 on the released branch and found out six years later that we forgot to also fix it on the development branch 🤦♂️
@icedquinn
I think nobody *prefers* public transport, except in areas where there's large traffic jams and the public transport bypasses those. Otherwise personal transport is faster and more convenient.
@sleepytako @rsf92 @pluralistic
I think nobody *prefers* public transport, except in areas where there's large traffic jams and the public transport bypasses those. Otherwise personal transport is faster and more convenient.
@sleepytako @rsf92 @pluralistic
@mirabilos
RFC3986, §3.1, second paragraph:
'An implementation should accept uppercase letters as equivalent to lowercase in scheme names (e.g., allow "HTTP" as well as "http") for the sake of robustness'
So if you are using something that doesn't work with uppercase letters in the scheme, file a bug. Otherwise, the uppercase letter causes no harm and is perfectly fine.
@sanguish
RFC3986, §3.1, second paragraph:
'An implementation should accept uppercase letters as equivalent to lowercase in scheme names (e.g., allow "HTTP" as well as "http") for the sake of robustness'
So if you are using something that doesn't work with uppercase letters in the scheme, file a bug. Otherwise, the uppercase letter causes no harm and is perfectly fine.
@sanguish
@jpmens
That is absolutely sad, indeed.
explainxkcd.com/1205 has dated comments, which establishes an upper limit, but that's of course not the same thing...
That is absolutely sad, indeed.
explainxkcd.com/1205 has dated comments, which establishes an upper limit, but that's of course not the same thing...
@atomicpoet
HOA? I know that only as 'home owners association', but that doesn't seem to fit here...
@maegul
HOA? I know that only as 'home owners association', but that doesn't seem to fit here...
@maegul
@mgorny
It's certainly possible if the granularity of the two formats is not the same; e.g., if you're converting from lossless 96kHz audio to lossless 48kHz audio, you'll still have lost some data.
It's certainly possible if the granularity of the two formats is not the same; e.g., if you're converting from lossless 96kHz audio to lossless 48kHz audio, you'll still have lost some data.
@foone
What's the offered price for that? Not that I'm suggesting you go for it, but I am very curious now...
What's the offered price for that? Not that I'm suggesting you go for it, but I am very curious now...