HN user

sc11

439 karma
Posts2
Comments68
View on HN

In the context of age limits, that is wrong. The German eID has a zero knowledge method of proving that your age is above a certain number without revealing anything else. That method has been around for like 15 years and these days, thanks to smartphones with NFC readers, is quite user-friendly.

In practice it's basically not used anywhere except for cigarette vending machines because it's much simpler to hire some dubious third party "wave your ID in front of your camera" service

Edit: mandatory age verification is still an atrocious idea for a number of other reasons, just to be clear

I'd be happy to pay for premium if it actually removed all ads from the platform. I wish they forced creators to declare which segments of a video are ads for their sponsors and then removed or skipped them for premium users. Basically built-in Sponsorblock except not crowd-sourced.

Alternatively, many creators already upload ad-free versions to their Patreon or other paywalled platforms, they could upload those to YouTube as well to be shown to premium users if YT allowed for it and forced them to.

Alas I'm not willing to pay 13€ a month for just slightly fewer ads.

Sure but assuming you're traveling from centre to centre, which is where population densities are highest, is a sound assumption. Otherwise you can always find spots where getting to the airport, train station, flixbus stop or whatever takes extremely long with one mode of transport over the other.

Doesn't distract from the point that long distances busses are very much not an alternative to rail (or planes for that matter) unless price is the deciding factor. And even the latter is questionable in many cases thanks to the 49€ ticket.

Let's see. Cologne to Berlin takes ~4:40 hours by train. Flixbus takes 9-10 hours, not counting the time it takes to get to their departure station which would involve a train journey as it's not actually in the city centre.

Flixbus is 50€ cheaper when traveling that route tomorrow but that's about all it has going for it.

It's used by lesbians just as often and giving vs receiving has nothing to do with fetishes. You can have the most vanilla sex imaginable and still have a top/bottom.

This isn't true everywhere. E.g. in the alps you might be billed for rescue, particularly if you're not injured or in a medical emergency. That said, SAR insurance is cheap. Many alpinist associations and the likes offer it as part of their membership, which is often less than 100€/yr. There's no reason not to have it if you're going out into the mountains.

In a sence it's also a move towards limiting user's freedom to chose where to store data, isn't it?

It's not, users can of course consent to data being stored elsewhere. The article explicitely points this out:

Instead, the court took the approach that data could only be lawfully transferred to the U.S. via a mutual legal assistance treaty (Article 48 GDPR), or under Article 49 GDPR’s derogations, such as consent. It confined its lawfulness analysis to those grounds alone.

True, that works as well.

Either way as a tenant it's best to do manual payments (even if they're automated on your end) each month so that lowering rent, if necessary, is straightforward.

SEPA direct debit is a really really popular thing in Germany. Most utilities prefer (quite understandably) to pull from you instead of waiting for your transfer. Even landlords usually give you an agreement form to pull your rent out of your account.

Landlords benefit from it because it makes it harder for your to lower your rent in case there are issues with the place that warrant it. If they can withdraw the rent directly, you'd have to undo that payment, pay the lowered amount manually etc. which makes it more hassle for you and also increases the risk of screwing up.

Thanks for working on the tool and being here!

Have you considered adding references to relevant sections of the party programs on the detailed thesis view?

For example, it might be interesting to see on [1] that the SPD claims to be in favour of the bill they just voted against. This is just one example, but I think an easy way to compare a vote with future claims of the parties would be interesting.

[1] https://btw21.deinwal.de/claim/019-229-02

I don't think it's quite as clear-cut. MPs are meant to vote according to their conscience, not party lines or coalition agreements.

It's a choice to vote against what a party claims to be their values in order to maintain stability in the coalition. The smaller party could also take a chance knowing the larger party won't abandon their comfy government position over it.

It's also interesting to figure out which values or plans a party has been willing to compromise on, since none of them publicly state this before elections.

I feel like these tools work best if you just use them as an additional data point in your decision.

The site deinwal.de tries to address this by letting you vote on past bills and then showing you who votes most similar to you.

However, for opposition parties this doesn't work reliably since they'll sometimes vote against something if it doesn't go far enough or if they disagree with the implementation details, even if they agree with the general idea. Unless you read up on the vote, these nuances will be missed.

It also reinforces the status quo since parties that aren't in parliament yet would not be covered.

Thankfully said EU law includes a part that it's forbidden to block content for copyright reasons if the copyright claim is invalid. It includes ways for NGOs and users to go after companies that overblock. How this will actually work in practice is unclear since it's obviously an impossible requirement but some NGOs like the German GFF are already collecting cases and are looking to take legal action (see e.g. https://freiheitsrechte.org/aufruf-illegale-sperrungen/ (in German))