Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit | more isbvhodnvemrwvn's comments login

Keep in mind that these communities are affected by what I call a "reddit effect" - they tend to be negative, so only people who dislike the company go there, creating a toxic negativity feedback loop. Same as many major subreddits which thrive on negativity and outrage. Take whatever you read there with a grain of salt.


I am wondering how much of the Blind app is this and how much is truth.


What time last year? Inflation has advanced quite a bit even since November.


Not a hiring freeze per say, but the hiring plans are reduced for the rest of the year due to high inflation and more conservative customer spending. Contractors and non-key consultants are not getting their contracts renewed either.


You need to talk with people and come up to an agreement, in situations like that conflict is inevitable.


Quite interesting. In Poland a lot of places have their bank number just on their website if you want to donate something, I don't think you can place a debit like that.


Bank accounts like that often have outgoing direct debits blocked to prevent fraud, as far as I know.

(I don't think there is a registry – this would simply be a bank-side setting to auto-decline all requested direct debits.)


My bank account number is also sometimes freely shared, so I think this is applied at national level (at least in case of Poland)


I mean statistics also show that it's a rather not common thing, and it'd be quite difficult to hide your house or apartment being on fire.


Fire yes, but smoke might be a different thing. Smoke/fire barrier doors are mostly a thing in commercial buildings.


In Poland you cut hours, so if the month has 21 working days in total, that's 168 hours full time, or 126 hours if you're on 3/4th of full time. You need to agree with the employer how you allocate those (there are limits, e.g. you can't work 12h days even if you want to).


Why?


Behind on tech companies, or forward in consumer rights?


Behind in tech companies, forward in useless consumer nagging

I am looking at you, EU cookie notice.


Please stop blaming these cookie notices on the law. The law clearly states no notice is required if no consent is required, but companies choose to annoy you.


The law - not the companies - explicitly forbids me from expressing my preferences globally at the browser level.

I know exactly what I am ready to accept - and what I want to reject. The law says "you have to repeat your preferences individually for each and every domain, you cannot have a system that applies your preferences automatically to everyone"

As a consequence I stand my ground: The law - not the companies - is nagging me.


> The law [...] explicitly forbids me from expressing my preferences globally at the browser level.

You are wrong. I have in fact read the law and if you think this you have not. Please do so if you are curious what it does in fact forbid, you can start here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/HTML/?uri=CEL...


I think what they meant is that consent has to be informed and specific, and he wants to give uninformed consent to any and all data collection, or wants to never be asked for consent.


I think (IANAL, but I have worked in this space with lawyers. Follow my advice at your own discretion, or rather please do not and ask a professional) a case could be made for global consent to be (broadly) appropriate, if your consent is indeed informed (i.e. the plugin asks you to read and understand what analytics cookies are, tracking cookies are and marketing cookies are). Of course, if your consent is "do to me what you want, even if it is an atrocity nobody has conceived of yet and I cannot be bothered to learn about", it is true that that cannot fall under such a requirement. Such consent would be meaningless and such a statement fundamentally indicative of what I can only term an extremely self-destructive frame of mind. I don't think that needs to be tolerated at this level, because it is not good for society to see this as anything but a problem.


I think you have read the wrong law and I have have read the right one, as the cookie handling requirements are defined in the ePrivacy Directive of 2002 and amended in 2009, not the GDPR.

You can start here: https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELE...

You will discover under section (17), that the lawmaker does - in fact - force everyone to give specific and informed consent. Which means that each and every website has to provide me a wall of informative text and a specific button to click. Aka: nag me.

I am not allowed to give a blanket "accept all" or "reject all" or "accept analytics, reject marketing" consent for all websites as this would be categorised as "uninformed and unspecific" consent, which is illegal. So the EU is responsible.


You are wrong. Such things are not forbidden, just not implemented. Again, a corporation is free to make a consumer-friendly solution that applies to everyone. But why would they? They'd expend effort just to annoy you less and let's face it, you're ready to accept any amount of annoying as long as you get what you want.

Edit: And besides, the point of this is analytics is unnecessary. As such, a company could opt not to have it. No consent required for an absence. They don't have to nag you for nothing.


Please provide a source for this claim. The GDPR is intentionally technically non-specific to allow for a wide array of technical solutions.

In fact one of the failures of DNT was its lack of regulatory backing, and its successor is specifically being designed to be a browser wide, GDPR compliant solution.


Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: