Me too, I wish the companies would obey the law without putting in the consent banner. It's not like there's any law obliging them to put in the consent banners. They freely chose to piss us all off even though they had the alternative of behaving like perfectly profitable pre-internet businesses and ... not tracking us.
Generally speaking ink printers are regarded as a decent option for someone whose printing is predictable. Its the people who print a bunch this week and then nothing for a month or so and then another burst, who benefit from laser printers, because there's no ink to dry up. It's not that hard to find yourself in this "sweet spot" where neither print shops nor ink printers are good value for money especially if you live in a country where bureaucracy is still paper-based.
Instead of directly exposing the server to the internet, you could keep it behind a VPN. That way you only need to keep the VPN secure, the VPN serves as a whitelist.
> Permanently losing access to an account sucks a lot.
But mostly that's all. Usually it's a minor inconvenience. Occasionally it sucks a bit. Rarely it sucks a lot. Almost never is anything of value lost. It can be wholly eliminated by good data practices e.g. backups. (No one backs up their Amazon account data. It isn't designed for it. Because the "webdevs" think of the data as their boss's - squarequoting "webdev" because the effective decision is the CEO's and the "webdev" is just taking some abstract, ill-thought-through decision and making the ramifications concrete.)
On the other hand, it also sucks a lot when your gratuitously collected private information is taken to the darkweb. As countries become more accustomed to dealing with databreaches, they are beginning to consider legislating harsh compensation requirements and painful fines. Once that's happened, almost all of the private data that the user has in their account? Let the user keep it. We webdevs and our mortal enemies in business/sales/product will have to innovate new decentralised databases - where each node is a users' computer. And yeah, some things will be harder or not even possible (for the user). Other things will become possible that aren't at the moment (for the user). And at least you won't go bankrupt when a state level actor decides your database is valuable.
There are some exceptions to this. Notably, Amazon is ruthless in enforcement of their "One Person, One Account" policy (worded not so eloquently in their official terms).
If you lose access to your Amazon account and open a new account, there's a non-trivial chance they shut it down without explanation. If your account ever participated in the marketplace from a seller side, then this policy is even more ruthlessly enforced.
Which means... email address verification is necessary for Amazon to at least guard against type-o's and other common form data-entry errors.
Is this policy for a specific kind of Amazon account? I didn't recall seeing anything in the TOS, and they appear to have first class support for people with multiple accounts.
Time didn't stop in the pandemic. The 2007 election was fought on the topic of a carbon transition. It's at least a decade and a half, and the anti-transition side hasn't given up yet so it's still ongoing. If the Andrews government is returned it may be the beginning of the end with their proposal for a renewables oriented renewed SEC, but it won't be the end for the country as a whole.
Some grids are more open than others. ElectricityMap scrapes public system operator websites (“ISOs”) or government data aggregators (US EIA balancing areas or ENTSOE in Europe) for their data.
To my knowledge, outside of Europe, there is no data reporting requirement, so this is all best effort (but it’s pretty good for best effort imho).
People aren't mass-leaving Twitter because Twitter owns their data. They were happy with someone else owning their data to the extent that they were users of Twitter. They're mass-leaving Twitter becomes Elon Musk bought Twitter. Elon Musk cannot buy Mastodon. He might buy your particular server, but the chances he'd try to are much more remote because the benefit of doing so is much less.
> to normies actually Gmail does equal Email and such
I'd love to hear of some evidence for that. I've never encountered anyone assuming that the bit after the @ has to be gmail.com, or being unclear and uncertain if they can communicate between their work Outlook account and their home Gmail account. This feels very much like someone's taken the idea "to most people, the internet just is the web" and run wild with it.
"Planes should not fall out of the sky. Aviation experts please fix this."
"Also, lawmakers, ensure the aviation experts fix this."
"Having regard to our advisors, we, the US lawmakers, have concluded that one criterion according to which aviation experts should judge their fix is that planes should have a doobywhacky in them, because aviation experts have assured us that a doobywhacky is important. But we will give them two years to get their plane certified without the doobywhacky on a legacy basis, since it seems like a good faith effort should be able to get legacy planes certified within two years."
"Aviation experts at Boeing, we, the aviation experts at the FAA would like to know some information about your planes."
"Aviation experts at Boeing, we, the aviation experts at the FAA need to know some information about your planes; what you have said is not good enough and you've left many questions unanswered."
"Oh, hi, US lawmaker, we, the lobbyists at Boeing thought you might like to know how bad it would be for you if the law isn't changed, yeah, we know everyone thought a good faith effort should be able to get legacy planes certified within two years, but you know how complicated planes can be."
And at this point, I think there are two possible replies: "Everyone believed it should have been possible, and there are clearly problems at Boeing's end, so they need to wear their mistakes; it's not like they're left with nothing and it's widely agreed that 737 MAX represents an end-of-line design so the cost is not excessive" or "The two years was written into the law to get these particular models out without conforming to the law; if they can be approved under the strictest application of the old rules, does it hurt if the approval is made just before the two year deadline, or just after it? In either case, it's flying according to the legacy certification. So we'll just extend the period a little."
I certainly think a case can be built either way, but knowledge of aviation is really only a minor part of the decision making process facing lawmakers right now.
