> This is one of the less appreciated clauses of the GDPR
One wonders if this clause should have instead been its own, separate, narrowly focused legislation and enforced specifically as such.
One wonders if this clause should have instead been its own, separate, narrowly focused legislation and enforced specifically as such.
1. You have hundreds of code reviewers, many of whom will have their own motivations
2. The code base is hundreds of years old, poorly maintained and often contradictory in its goals.
3. You have hundreds of millions users.
For example, many more opportunities to cause government shutdowns, and many more must-pass bills that can be loaded with pork.
ftfy. and I'd add that being from the US, I'd expect that sunset clauses on all laws would have the effect of giving the legislators something to do other than raise money for reelection.
I also think it would encourage less partisan and more consensus-built legislation if the number of votes it passes with extends the amount of time before it sunsets, esp. if the relationship is not linear. Right now, if you have 50%+1 vote in the House, and 60 in the Senate, you don't have to care about the rest, so you can make legislation as extreme as you can while remaining within those boundaries. But if the difference in getting extra votes is a renewal vote in 25 years (with, say, 3/4 supermajority passing) versus just 5 years (50%+1), those extra votes may well be worth fighting for with some concessions.
There are some known issues of compilers eliding the zero-ing out of secret data. There is no portable way of enforcing this.
good grief... I live in this world!