For the record - it's not a complaint, just a remark - i'm 95% sure the website text is written by Claude. Nothing wrong with that but some people may be annoyed by that, and I don't see a disclaimer about it.

[–] Zahtu@feddit.org 15 points 23 hours ago (1 children)

cool malicious compliance xD

[–] theunknownmuncher@lemmy.world 16 points 23 hours ago

benevolent non-compliance

[–] michael@piefed.chrisco.me 6 points 23 hours ago

First time Ive heard about Milk-V Duo S. Interesting. Looks very cheap!

[+] Archr@lemmy.world -17 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago) (2 children)

This just seems like an attempt to get sued to challenge the law.

Funny the amount of work that people are putting into such a nothing burger of a law.

Edit: also interesting to see the critical meltdown our community has over a law that doesn't even require ID verification.

Edit 2: also I will be honest I did not read the entire home page. It is like 5 or 6 times longer than the law that it is complaining about.

[–] Redkey@programming.dev 10 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

It's the first law that I'm aware of that legally requires an automated system that you own and operate to snitch on you at any time, to anyone who asks, without asking your permission.

For the moment, it only has to report a piece of data that you are free to lie about. For the moment.

[–] Archr@lemmy.world -4 points 14 hours ago

But you do give it permission. The data is only shared when you either install or open an application. Both things that you need to initiate. Nothing in the law requires that the data be sent off device. Ideally all of this checking would happen on device. And for those apps that don't meet that standard, don't use them.

[–] Darkcoffee@sh.itjust.works 13 points 21 hours ago* (last edited 21 hours ago) (1 children)

It's like, why do you care if a cop searches your car or your apartment, if you got nothing to hide!

Edit: /s in case you thought I was as dumb as that comment lol