> I have some side projects that I don’t really care about making money from but some people do use and it’s easier for me to just block all European users than worry about complying with all the random laws and regulations.
GDPR fines scale based on annual turnover so blocking EU users on a non-commercial product is utterly pointless and just being mean.
What treating this biometric info as public means is that it won’t be accepted as valid proof of identity. Just because you posted a video on TikTok shouldn’t mean that a scammer can take out a loan in your name.
The guard makes sure the biometircs presented to the reader actually belong to the person standing there. The reader identifies who (in its database) the presented biometircs belong to.
> but this is a can worse than climate change we are kicking towards future generations.
That’s just nonsense. Even if we turn a large area into a radioactive waste dump, that problem pales in comparison to the massive external and internal migrations, food crop failure and wars that climate change will cause in our lifetimes.
If these things really become good enough to automate software engineering then it’s just a matter of time before they are used to automate all information work.
That would be such a radical societal transformation that I’m not sure we would come out of the other side even having a capitalist society.
Maybe off-topic but I remember when people were worried about services becoming digital and older users no longer being able to access them without a personal computer.
Fast forward a few decades and now the old users are on desktop and we’re worried about services only being available for smartphones.
Wouldn’t you? If I switch context and interrupt my flow to answer a question I’m losing at least 20 mins to regaining focus, why shouldn’t that be reflected in billing?
Knowledge work is knowledge work, no point belittling colleagues in a different profession.
> I think that often theres a difference in ability to put capital to work between the US and europe.
It’s because the EU is 27 different countries with different regulations while the US is 1. Some work is being done to fix this but remains to be seen if we can reach a point where we have unified capital markets instead of national ones.
That does not prevent something like this project happening which includes 23 different European countries, and not even through the EU.
The point of the EU is to provide unified markets, and capital flows pretty freely between major European economies (including those outside the EU) so I do not think that is it.
That is something that remains outside the EU's remit because it is military and decision lie in the hands of member states.
I was rebutting a claim that differences in regulations preventing capital flows. That is not true in general in our globalised world (capital clearly flows freely between many countries) and certainly not true in the EU.
It is possible that the EU loses somewhat from not having the central budget that the US federal government has which which to back big projects, but, in most cases, the bigger EU states are big enough to back most things (as is the UK) but will not do so. The lack of fiscal centralisation in the EU also affects its financial stability but I do not think that is directly related to this problem.
As for sixth general fighters, a number of smaller economies than Germany alone have or plan their own sixth generation fighters, or have done so (some programmes have merged). Again, a difference in attitude and priorities.
GDPR fines scale based on annual turnover so blocking EU users on a non-commercial product is utterly pointless and just being mean.