Another succinct quote: “The brain learns during the breaks.” Repeating the same thing uninterrupted in order to learn it won’t help.
bleistift2
joined 2 years ago
I can still remember how the news in fucking Germany changed. Suddenly, once Biden was in office, we didn’t get US politics in our evening news multiple times per week anymore. The United States became silent again.
NY–LA via Amtrak: $291. Greyhound, a bus company: $139
Why not both? Companies that peel bananas and wrap them in plastic for sale are garbage companies. And people who buy them are garbage people.
It’s conceivable as an adventure trip or if a Portuguese wanted to see Northern lights. But I guess the trip NY–LA is way more common.
The States’ population centers are on the far edges of the continent. That’s not the case in Europe, where they’re more evenly distributed.
I’m not sure which meaning of ‘should be able to be voided’ you’re using. Do you mean ‘Why do think it’s legal to void it’ or ‘Why do you think it’s legitimate to be able to void it’?
In the first case: My employment contract does exactly this. It’s become kind of a default clause in contracts. Researching this you’ll find a lot of websites (in German) that say that the clause is ‘abdingbar’ (which I translated as ‘voidable’).
In the second case: I didn’t say I thought it legitimate, and I don’t have a strong opinion on this.
You have control over whether you eat pork or tofu, don’t you? You have control over whether you buy a new iPhone or a used FairPhone, don’t you? You have control over whether you plan a trip via airplane or via train, don’t you?
I mean dude you’re defending Meta, arguably the single worst company when it comes to respecting user data and privacy
That’s argumentum ad hominem. If the law means what you think it means, it applies whether we’re talking about EvilCorp or SaveTheWhaleChildrenBeeFluff.
Also recall the very first thing I said on this topic:
I’m all for GDPR and really enjoy its protections, but I don’t understand this one.
I’m playing devil’s advocate in order to gain insight, because I have no clue how this board reaches its conclusions.
I can’t find the word ‘unbiased’ in the GDPR. All it asks for is consent:
- Processing shall be lawful only if and to the extent that at least one of the following applies:
a) the data subject has given consent to the processing of his or her personal data for one or more specific purposes;
In the case of facebook, the user gives consent for the purpose of being served targeted advertising in exchange for the provided service.
[Edit:] Found something:
When assessing whether consent is freely given, utmost account shall be taken of whether, […] the provision of a service, is conditional on consent to the processing of personal data that is not necessary for the performance of that contract. Article 7, paragraph 4 GDPR
So the question of whether the pay-or-consent model is legal hinges upon the question of whether payment (in any form) is “necessary for the performance of that contract“.
You vastly underestimate the tolerance of an average user who barely knows their way around a web browser and Word.