GiuseppaAcciaio

Ignoring WebMD for a second because there are no citations in the article so all we have is the word of the person who wrote the article, it's usually not enough to cite a single contrary article to make a claim that someone hasn't done research properly. I can't access the article you cite, however a single meta-analysis from 1995 from a journal dedicated to alternative medicine in nursery and midwifery doesn't sound like the ultimate source; a casual check on Cochrane Review (https://www.cochrane.org/CD009215/PREG_aromatherapy-for-pain...) suggests that there are simply too few scientific studies to be able to say anything about whether it works or not (which is a polite way to say that if it did work, we'd know by now).

A lot of pharmacies I see in Europe and UK sell homeopathy, and by according to a schoolmate who graduated in Pharmacy and inherited the license to run one from his dad (Italy is weird like that), homeopathic products are among the biggest cash cows for them, together with supplements.

My uneducated guess would be that someone who is so B12-deficient to require an injection (rather than just taking a daily pill) is unlikely to be able attend a Goop wellness event on account of the neurological damage :)

I've had this argument all day yesterday (on Discord, of course) about whether Steam can ever be dethroned, and your last sentence nails it on the head: while Steam has tried for a while to integrate social features into their store (and made a real mess of it), Discord is THE place where engaged gamers go to find a community. I buy on Steam because I like the centralised hub for installing and uninstalling, but the discovery process is just horrible: most of the games that go on my wishlist come from suggestions from other players in the Discord servers I'm active in. I only spend on Steam the bare minimum time I need to manage my library. I imagine that for a developer it must be a pretty good prospect, having the product for sale just a click away from where the discussion is; for me as a consumer the critical part will be how well the store works on mobile: I do 90% of my Discord activity on an iPhone, and if it's as frictionless as buying on Steam but with a better mobile experience, I will definitely give it a go.

Because I can have decently reliable voice calls with people around the world from my mobile app on a UK 4G connection, when bloody Skype for Business, GoToMeeting and the like shit the bed on a daily basis when trying to have a call from a business line?

Am I the only one incensed at the fact that unlike haveibeenpwned, spycloud stores the passwords in the database, right next to the usernames?

No way, the Discworld MUD is still alive? I used to wake up at 6am to play it before school in 1998-ish because that was the only time I could get 1-2 hours of uninterrupted dial-up uptime. I wonder if the LAG is still around to kick, and if someone has ever managed to kill Carrot :)

Well, they do compete in Eurovision, I guess that's kinda the same thing?

That's great but requires the people I send the link to to a) install Firefox b) install the extension.

I'd prefer something that I can install on my phone browser to redirect me automatically to the non-AMP version, I'll do some digging.

When I'm in "dumb user" mode, especially on mobile, I get very irked when I search for something (on Google, because no matter how much I like DuckDuckGo on principle, the results are just not good enough), tap on a link and find myself on a google.com address AMP. It's an irrational response, but I do feel like I've been swindled/misdirected; on mobile in particular it's annoying because if I want to link the page to someone I don't want the AMP link, and the process of getting the "real" URL is several steps too many. Not to mention the valuable real estate taken by the AMP sandwich button toolbar.

My non-technical significant other and my dad have repeatedly asked me if those pages are safe to visit: after training them for years on the heuristic of mistrusting a page where the URL doesn't match the expectation, AMP is now breaking it for them and causing unnecessary insecurity.

They may have privately requested an extension to the deadline, or they may have submitted the response and the FAA are reviewing the evidence. I don't expect to see any official response until at least end of July.

Indeed, the FAA have no real reason to authorize that; I would also not expect them to want to grant any exemptions on a blanket basis: usually aviation authorities make rulings on specific aircraft, based on the flight and maintenance data.

Of course Boeing want to deliver the planes, otherwise they get hit by significant late delivery penalties.

However, thanks to how the industry is regulated, Boeing don't take chances if there is a risk to passenger safety. In this case, the likelihood of a single engine shutdown due to this elusive bug + the failure of the automatic restart system + the failure of the manual restart procedures, _combined with the fact that all commercial aircraft needs to be able to operate with only one of the engines_, makes Boeing ask for the exemption.

The FAA, on their part, is 100% right in demanding that Boeing show their work and is unlikely to grant such an exemption unless the risk is calculated to be negligible.

Non-round stuff in space of a sufficient mass does tend to shift back to being round over the course of millions of years, so absence of non-roundness is not proof that parts of it were not ripped away at some point or other. Uranus is a gas giant (actually some call it an ice giant) so there's no way it would ever take a non-round shape for more than a few instants).

What you call "space agencies" is in this case Durham University's department of Computational Cosmology; if you read the article, there is no need to blindly believe anything: Uranus had been observed having strange behaviour compared to other planets in the solar system, and the researchers at Durham just built a computational model that shows how you can "derive" the observable behaviour of Uranus by starting with a "healthy" planet and simulating an impact with a massive object. That's it.

Is it the Holy Gospel? No. But it's a simple explanation which does not violate any law of physics and which does not necessitate further hypotheses being made. Is it the truth? Who knows, maybe in the future we will disprove this theory in a conclusive way and a new hypothesis will take its place: that's how science works, no belief needed.

My wife and I deep cleaned the house then made a visual task board with different small (less than 30m) chores assigned to one or the other, on rotation, on a weekly basis. The house has never been less than acceptably clean (to a mother-in-law standard) since :)

Also, decluttering and reorganizing all storage spaces using the Marie Kondo method (where it made sense) helped a lot and once done it's hard to relapse.

Let's read the actual document then shall we? It's written in plain enough language for anyone to understand: http://ec.europa.eu/newsroom/just/document.cfm?doc_id=47889 20m is one of the two ceilings (the other being 10m) for fines, and in several paragraphs in the document I linked the principles of discretionality, effectiveness and proportionality are stated. If a regulator tried to levy a $20m fine against a startup for a first offence, there would be a strong case to appeal the ruling at an EU court

It's not a 20m / 4% floor, the fines will be discretionary and most importantly are likely to be incremental. EU regulatory authorities do not usually operate in a "shut your service off for non-compliance" mode: assuming they receive a tip-off about your business not being compliant with GDPR 1) they send you a notice and ask for proof of compliance. If you produce evidence, the case is likely closed. 2) assuming you can't produce that evidence, they will give you a warning and a deadline by which to become compliant. A small fine may be levied at this time 3) if the deadline passes without you having done anything, they will eventually get round to giving you a new date, issue a sterner warning and increase the fine for non compliance. To get a $20m fine you'd have to be a massive corporation and be caught repeatedly flaunting the regulation in an outrageous and damaging way (for the consumer); any idea of closing off your small service / website / whatever to EU users because of the perceived risk of a fine is a massive overreaction.

You could have an automated report generator/emailer to deal with a), point the user to your privacy policy for answer to b), and finally again have an automated process for c) as well. This doesn't seem to be in the "learn a new language" effort ballpark to me. If you're handling user data for a side project, then you'd better be serious enough about protecting your users' privacy; if not, either remove the need to store any more data than is required to provide whatever service it is you're providing, or rethink your approach to starting a project in the first place.

Alright, let me rephrase: I am interested in such companies that somehow have my details on record despite me never contacting them, and who show no understanding of the principles of GDPR; in particular I want to know what they hold about me and what the source of their data is, which is why I send the letter (which I have modified to remove the stuff I am not concerned about). Some of them have since replied with "we've gone ahead and deleted all your data", which could be interpreted in many ways I guess

I've been involved in the GDPR-proofing of the company that employs me in the UK, and find that the questions are the same that our consultants put to us when identifying where we stood. Based on my experience (medium sized manufacturing company) I think that the letter really becomes a nightmare when the company receiving it has not looked into it at all, or when their business model relies on being able to ignore consent from users for their processing; in other cases, and especially for any company that sells to businesses rather than individuals, GDPR compliance is really not that bad IMO.

I have to confess, it's a guilty pleasure of mine to respond with a variant of the Nightmare GDPR letter to SOME companies who sent me the classic "we're sure that you want to access all the amazing benefits of our data processing so if you REALLY want to opt-out you'll need to click on this link and manually remove consent from a couple hundred 3rd party providers" email. I'd never do that to any company (big or small) with whom I have legitimately interacted, but a lot of this drivel has come from random recruitment companies that must have scraped my details from my CV or Linkedin or wherever.