

What is wrong with the GDPR and the ePrivacy directive? The only problem I see is that they don’t go far enough (online tracking, for example)


What is wrong with the GDPR and the ePrivacy directive? The only problem I see is that they don’t go far enough (online tracking, for example)
“Just concentrate”
Wow, why didn’t I think of that?


That’s the thing: if he went by Womble at work then that was his name. The fact that the government called him Raymond doesn’t make that his only name, they are both valid.


Fun fact, you can use whatever names you want. All names are made up. Your “legal name” is just what the government calls you, but you can ask other people to call you something else entirely. The same goes with pronouns.


To be clear, I am not minimizing the problems of scrapers. I am merely pointing out that this strategy of proof-of-work has nasty side effects and we need something better.
These issues are not short term. PoW means you are entering into an arms race against an adversary with bottomless pockets that inherently requires a ton of useless computations in the browser.
When it comes to moving towards something based on heuristics, which is what the developer was talking about there, that is much better. But that is basically what many others are already doing (like the “I am not a robot” checkmark) and fundamentally different from the PoW that I argue against.
Go do heuristics, not PoW.


I get that website admins are desperate for a solution, but Anubis is fundamentally flawed.
It is hostile to the user, because it is very slow on older hardware andere forces you to use javascript.
It is bad for the environment, because it wastes energy on useless computations similar to mining crypto. If more websites start using this, that really adds up.
But most importantly, it won’t work in the end. These scraping tech companies have much deeper pockets and can use specialized hardware that is much more efficient at solving these challenges than a normal web browser.
Fun fact, the can opener was invented more than 80 years after people started putting food in tin cans.


The fight for privacy and digital freedom is inherently political.
Yes, the GDPR covers almost everything you do with personal data. That is the point. As long as you’re being respectful to data subjects the GDPR is surprisingly mild.
You’re the one claiming the government is regulating tech too much, below an article about Apple making that same claim. And when pressed about specifics, you brand the entire thing as off-topic.
It is very much on topic, you just don’t want to provide an argument.