bradleyy

And the author of the PR came in a little hot, which probably didn't help.

So yeah, when you stop taking something that protects your heart and kidneys, it stops protecting... your heart and kidneys.

There's an increasing body of work that indicates that long-term GLP use (initially higher doses for weight loss, then tapering down) retains the cardiac and kidney benefits and can actually lead to additional weight loss.

That era hardware (although I ended up with a fair bit of experience on the whole Sun 3/4 lines)... I had just gotten out of the Army, didn't know what I was going to be when I grew up, and the future was so terrifying but bright.

It's a good thing that I don't horde (except cars, that's a problem), because I'd have racks of these things. Named after Star Trek characters, not because I care about it, but because that was the naming convention at one of my first "real jobs".

IDK, maybe nobody else thinks this way, but I'm really glad to see someone fixing one.

Somewhere in my copious free time I should take a pass at this.

Although I'm continually hammering the daylights out of message/job queues, I never seem to have the time to do simulations like this. Kinda hoping that the increased leverage I've been getting from LLM-assisted coding lately might actually free me up to finally do some of these type of tests.

Seattleites are a resourceful lot.

Sorry to have bothered you, but I assure you that your Access or Deletion request will be processed when you submit it. I know that submitting an email in a form is so much different for you than sending an email (since you've characterized it as somehow acceptable).

Are you suggesting that we should "provide the information from your GDPR access request without you actually asking for us to do so, without any commercially reasonable verification?"

Note I won't be responding further: you're not in earnest. But I do assure you that any requests will be properly processed.

Had you communicated your consent preferences through GPC or DNT, all those scripts that you call out would have been blocked. Just for your awareness.

Is getting consent interruptive? yes. Is that worse than not getting consent? Also yes.

Since you don't appear to want to give up the undisputed evil of tracking, then consent is what's left to you. You've made the same choice as everyone else.

I'd encourage you to respect GPC and DNT, so the (roughly 20%, depending on audience) of users that have it enabled can automatically opt out of your tracking without the "crystal clear evil" of a consent banner. Remember that in California you need to show some display that their consent choices have been observed.

I'd be happy to discuss directly if you want. Not sure how to exchange details if you're interested but we can figure something out I guess.

You're required to disclose. I didn't say consent.

This is precisely why I say talk to a lawyer. I appreciate the firmness of your conviction, but not reading what was explicitly stated, well.

If you're in any way something beyond a hobbyist, you should probably get legal advice about whether you need to get affirmative or implicit consent, whether you need to handle universal opt-out signals (in California, Global Privacy Control signals are now legally required to be respected), etc.

Simply saying "oh I'm only tracking local cookies" might not even be enough in GDPR because the act of writing any cookie is actually covered under the law (because you're storing something on the user's computer). You're required to disclose that these cookies are in use.

And a proper consent banner will immediately handle your GPC signal, and generally not show you anything (California now requires a visual notification that your preference has been respected).

I understand what the author is actually saying: you can design sites that don't require the tracking tools requiring consent. And yes, while true at a certain (small) scale, when you have hundreds of millions or billions of page loads per month, and several development teams, a partnership group, and a lot of moving parts, you'll forgive me for thinking this is impractical.

Consent banners don't have to be awful, I promise.

Again, this is sometimes appropriate, but it's desperately wrong in so many places it gets used.

    California's "Opt Me Out Act" (AB 566) requires that by January 1, 2027, internet browsers must provide a built-in, easy-to-use setting that allows users to send an opt-out preference signal, such as Global Privacy Control.

This combined with governments ignoring it, and actively enforcing GPC... it's questionable whether compliance is necessary (I still suggest treating it the same as a GPC signal).

But future work and effort should be put towards the GPC signal.