The analogy is that on the one hand you have a corporation where you know who they are, where you know which laws they are governed by, where you know how to file a privacy complaint, where you know who to sue in case something goes wrong. And you don’t trust them.

Instead you choose to trust some rando from the internet. Where anyone with a sane mind knows they will get screwed over.

I’'d argue changing who can see your data from either a large group to a smaller one or one you do trust vs one you do not trust precisely is protecting your privacy.

It’s always astounding to me that people put more trust in an intangible rando from the internet than into organizations governed by law. Like those people who don’t accept mainstream medicine but eat random supplements they imported from India by the kilogram.

Also FWIW you can host your VPN, you do not have to rely on a commercial VPN provider.

Sure you can. And where does that traffic go?

If you e.g. host a VPN in your home network and you connect to it from your phone, and then you use this connection to access the internet, then your traffic will just be visible to your home network’s ISP instead of your phone’s ISP.

Apart from maybe you, everyone knows that it’s currently legal. Why do you so urgently want to discuss it?

But ok, let’s catch you up to speed. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. Do you want me to repeat it?

It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that. It is currently legal. Everyone knows that.

With that out of the way, answer the question or go away.

It has nothing to do with hypotheticals but with goals. Do you do the same when you negotiate for your salary?

“Do you want a raise?” - “No, I don’t deal in hypotheticals. Understand how much I earn.” - “Ok, no raise for you.”

This can only be sarcasm.

I’ve seen it often enough that people are too dumb to read articles they post to understand that the article disproves their point.

But you are too dumb to even read the headline which already disproves your point.

It took me quite some time to figure it out!

Sure, the car is red, so it must sell for $100k.

It’s on the same level as the rest of your post. Pure lies, nothing else.

Username does check out.

You know what’s better than guesstimates and gut feelings?

Actual statistics: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/10575677211036498

In adjusted 2020 USD, the economic yield from panhandling is most often  $2–$16 per hour, $20–$60 per day, and $200–$500 per month

Slightly less than your projected $45 for 8 hours a day.

Yes, he’s heard that from a reliable source on facebook and/or his drunk buddy.

His buddy is also able to make up any statistic he could need right on the spot.

Sure, starving is a much better way to go.

Now we only need someone to make a Linux handheld with an Nvidia GPU and then we’ll finally get some decent drivers for gaming laptops (which, sadly, are pretty much Nvidia-only).

As I said, it doesn’t protect, it changes who can see the data.

Your ISP might not be able to see it, but your VPN provider will instead. VPN providers are hardly ever under any kind of regulation, except those run by secret services, of which there are many.

And there are more than enough VPNs that sell customer data while claiming to be amazing for your privacy.

You keep ignoring the question. The question is not “is it legal” but “should it be legal”.

Because petitions are about changing laws. They are the process through which the population can ask for a law change.

I have no idea why you keep bringing up copyright. Copyright is not a magical “get out of jail free” card that excempts you from following the law. It literally has nothing to do with the discussion at hand, same as whether this is legal right now or not. Your comments are constantly offtopic.

1: that’s offtopic. Neither does anyone advocate for buyers purchasing the copyright, nor does the copyrhight give the copyright owner unmitigated power to do whatever they want (aka disregard laws).

What the petition asks for is that people actually own their licensed copy and that ownership of the copy is treated the same as ownership of any other copy of any IP. For example, if you own a book, you too own a licensed copy of the book. This means that e.g. the copyright owner cannot legally stop you from reselling the copy (and believe me, they tried. But laws were enacted to stop that).

The owner of a book also doesn’t have the right to unilaterally revoke your license to the book. They legally cannot put fine print somewhere into the book that dicdates that you have to return the book when they ask you to or anything like that.

The petition asks the same for games:

• Publishers need to be legally stopped from limiting the buyers from using the copy they bought.

2: That is discussed in the petition as well. I recommend that you read the petition before commenting about it.

Isn’t that the same statement twice?

Problem is that you now have no new experiences at all anymore, only the old ones remain.

It’s hard to test the whole system with all special tests manually. At least if your project is more than a static website or something similarly trivial.

That’s why auto tests are there to increase your testing coverage, so that one change won’t break your system in unexpected ways, especially if you do system-wide changes like upgrading your framework or core systems to a new version.

Tests can be messed up just like anything else can be messed up. Doesn’t mean that the concept itself is flawed.

If you only do things that people cannot mess up, then you’ll quickly end up not doing anything at all.

The biggest benefit to me that testing has is when refactoring. If I have decent test coverage and I change something major, tests help me to see if I accidentally broke something on the way, which is especially helpful if I am touching ancient code written by someone who left the company years ago.

Capturing the rules as documentation (especially external documentation like confluence) is a great way to make sure nobody ever reads it. Or even finds it.

Beware that a VPN doesn’t protect your privacy, it just changes who has access to your data.

And enable network filtering and set a good adblock hosts file.