Novocirab

And, most importantly, it's about so much more than just the banners. For example:

(1) A new GDPR loophole via "pseudonyms" or "IDs". The Commission proposes to significantly narrow the definition of "personal data" – which would result in the GDPR not applying to many companies in various sectors. For example, sectors that currently operate via "pseudonyms" or random ID numbers, such as data brokers or the advertising industry, would not be (fully) covered anymore. This would done by adding a "subjective approach" in the text of the GDPR.

Instead of having an objective definition of personal data (e.g. data that is linked to a directly or indirectly identifiable person), a subjective definition would mean that if a specific company claims that it cannot (yet) or does not aim to (currently) identify a person, the GDPR ceases to apply. Such a case-by-case decision is inherently more complex and everything but a “simplification”. It also means that data may be “personal” or not depending on the internal thinking of a company, or given the circumstances that they have at a current point. This can also make cooperation between companies more complex as some would fall under the GDPR and others not.

(2) Pulling personal data from your device? So far, Article 5(3) ePrivacy has protected users against remote access of data stored on "terminal equipment", such as PCs or smartphones. This is based on the right to protection of communications under Article 7 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU and made sure that companies cannot "remotely search" devices.

The Commission now adds "white listed" processing operations for the access to terminal equipment, that would include "aggregated statistics" and "security purposes". While the general direction of changes is understandable, the wording is extremely permissive and would also allow excessive "searches" on user devices for (tiny) security purposes.

(3) AI Training of Meta or Google with EU's Personal Data? When Meta or LinkedIn started using social media data, it was widely unpopular. In a recent study for example only 7% of Germans say that they want Meta to use their personal data to train AI. Nevertheless, the Commission now wants to allow the use of highly personal data (like the content of 15+ years of a social media profile) for AI training by Big Tech.

"We're getting rid of the cookie banners" and "removing overly rigid regulation" is apparently how this massive proposal is being framed now, but what it chiefly does is—of course—benefit giant corporations, do little if anything for smaller companies, and fuck over people's privacy.

Licensing terms only govern the legal aspects, not social and moral aspects.

And not to forget: FUTO is evil.

Till Steffen is a German lawyer and politician of Alliance 90/The Greens who has been serving as a member of the German Bundestag since the 2021 elections, representing the Hamburg-Eimsbüttel district. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Till_Steffen)

Sparda doch offenbar nicht.

(Zur GLS: fun fact, bei der ddg-Suche "gls anthroposophie" ist gleich das dritte Ergebnis dieser Feddit-Thread vom Januar: https://feddit.org/post/7263045)

HLI von GNU Talern. Sehr Interessant!

Stallman has described the program as "designed to be anonymous for the payer, but payees are always identified."[11] In a paper published in Security, Privacy, and Applied Cryptography Engineering, GNU Taler is described as meeting ethical considerations – the paying customer is anonymous while the merchant is identified and taxable.

Dahero: Sollte bei euch irgendwann ein Wechsel der Bank anstehen (z.B. weil die alte die Gebühren erhöht), schaut bei den Kandidaten auch darauf, ob sie Wero unterstützen. Bonus natürlich, wenn es eine Genossenschaftsbank ist, wie z.B. die Sparda-Banken.