Spoken like a person who never even touched it even on a small project.
No cookies... so no language preferences. That is a profile cookie.
Right to erasure. What about invoices and orders? When can it be anonymous and when is it old enough to anonymize.
Do I get away with replacing personal data random data? Do I replace references to real people with 'anonymous person'? Will my sql constraints still work?
When I restore data from backup and someone has been anonymized in the meantime, what mechanism will be used to anonymize the user after restore?
Right to data portability. How much of the database and in what format?
> Right to erasure. What about invoices and orders? When can it be anonymous and when is it old enough to anonymize.
Invoices should typically fall under the “legal obligation” legal basis (article 6(1)c). See for how long the law requires you to keep them. In my country, it's 10 years.
>Do I get away with replacing personal data random data?
Yes, see WP216.
>Do I replace references to real people with 'anonymous person'? Will my sql constraints still work?
How do you do when someone deletes their account?
>When I restore data from backup and someone has been anonymized in the meantime, what mechanism will be used to anonymize the user after restore?
It's up to you to decide.
>Right to data portability. How much of the database and in what format?
The same as for a DSAR. As for the format, it's up to you to decide, provided it is a commonly used format.
> MozJPEG is a patch for libjpeg-turbo. Please send pull requests to libjpeg-turbo if the changes aren't specific to newly-added MozJPEG-only compression code.
The worst thing is not the existence of namespaces, but that are are relatively often implemented incorrectly.
As an example of things that sometimes break:
* namespace redefinition: you have xmlns:ns1 on a parent node and xmlns:ns1 with different value on a child node.
* same namespace on sibling nodes (happens often with streaming): multiple child nodes have a xmls:ns1 with some value. That is only valid for that node.
* some processors expect namespaces only on a specific node (I think it was MS Navision ~ decade ago that failed when declaration wasn't on a specific node, but on a child node)
Indeed. There is an XML formatted file that is important to the engineers at my company. Sometimes they're namespaced; sometimes not, so just I remove the namespace if it's there. It wasn't like the people who defined the namespace gave us any usable format definition to work with anyway. The only thing worse than XML is an XML definition that's only half-implemented.
raw = Nokogiri::XML(File.read(uploaded_file).gsub(/ xmlns="[^"]\*"/, "")) { |config| config.noblanks }
I am yet to see a system that uses namespaces 100% correctly, especially larger systems. XMPP is closest but they still have the stream tag defined as carrying a namespace, but as being the "same" stream tag without specifying it to be so, last I recall.
The annoying thing is namespaces are not that complicated. They're probably five times more complicated than they need to be because you're always dealing with some library or system's half-assed bizarre implementation of them instead of the rather simple spec.
> Corporation, n. An ingenious device for obtaining individual profit without individual responsibility.
For those who do not recognize it, that’s a quote from The Devil’s Dictionary, written by Ambrose Bierce between 1881 and 1906, published in full in 1911. And yes, that is the full definition given for the word “Corporation”:
to describe that from another angle -- history is full of great violence, great chemical harm, great swindles and great despots "which worked remarkably well and makes us richer" .. Puritans and swamp-hunters have been pushed aside by New York attorneys and their masters of the day. And we allow all of that "because it works remarkably well and makes us richer" .. and I able to type this too.
He likely means that companies will use the software and create issues with their problems without contributing anything back = developer will be free support for companies making money with no benefit.
AGPL doesn't have such problems because it's more radioactive than anything for companies = will be used only by other free software developers
The author is a copyright lawyer by trade as well a software developer so he understands both problem spaces; he identifies several glaring legal defects in the BSD and MIT licenses; and together with a group of other copyright lawyers developed a license that addresses all of those shortcomings. If I were in his shoes I would promote it too.
Of course he had. Check https://blueoakcouncil.org/about Kyle Mitchell who wrote that MIT license deprecation article is also the one who developed Blue Oak license.
No, MIT license is not deprecated. Ton of FOSS projects use it and will continue to use it.
It’s not “deprecated” in any official sense, but it has several legal defects that in 2023 ought to remove it from consideration for use as a permissive license in nearly all cases.
> Kyle Mitchell who wrote that MIT license deprecation article is also the one who developed Blue Oak license.
OK, well, if that's not good enough for you: The other two Blue Oak board members listed at that site — Heather Meeker and Luis Villa — both have serious reputations in this field.
(Disclosure: Kyle Mitchell is a friend, and both a good lawyer and a good guy.)
SYCL is still very early on in development and I don’t see it really picking up until support is up-streamed to the llvm project, at the very least. That said, I am a firm believer in the single source philosophy. There just isn’t a tractable alternative.
https://www.ghisler.com/history1100.txt
Even after 30 years there are still things to fix pretty much every day. Maintenance is really endless task