swongel

There is a word for "love" in dutch; it's the noun "liefde" (of which lieve is an adjective). However you cannot use "liefde" as a verb, hence my question if this is the case in Deitsch as they are related languages within the Germanic language family.

Usually in dutch we use "houden van" -> To hold (dearly).

But with our grammar the word "houden" may also literally mean to hold. "Ik hou een hamer vast (in mijn hand)." -> "I hold a hammer (fastened in my hand)". In dutch this is considered a different word though, as vast + houden even when written apart in a sentence is considered a compound verb vasthouden. (Like how babysitting in English is not the same verb as sitting).

In German you use the word Lieben as a verb and a noun, so in German you can say Ich liebe dich (I love you) but also like a noun "Die Liebe" (lit: the love)

In Dutch you cannot say: Ik liefde jou, in the same way in English you cannot say: I feelings you.

But you can if use the word Liefde as a noun or adjective to make it something like: - Mijn liefde is alleen voor jou. (lit: My love is only for you). (romantic) - Jij bent mijn ware liefde (lit: You are my true love). (romantic) - Mijn lieve vriend (lit: My lovely friend) (platonic or romantic) - Onze lieve vrouw (lit: Our lovely lady) (exclusively used in reference to Maria AFAIK) - Dat was lief van hem (lit: That was lovely of him). (platonic)

In contemporary Dutch, people use a lot of code switching with English words, so you could hear someone say "love you" romantically, or even just the word "love" mixed in dutch like this:

- Love you, schat (I love you honey) (lit: Love you, treasure) - Ik ben in love (I am in love)

Language purist and language prescriptive Dutch teachers do not like this and would not consider it to be correct dutch. (Which personally I think is absolutely hilarious, as dutch to me is very much a "bastard language" and the notion that we should cling prescriptively to the current version of our language as some sort of canonical form is absurd).

But that's also why I was wondering if _that_ is why the author in the original article was using Liebe instead of Liewe, as code switching with a cognate might allow the loanword to be used as a "verb" while the original word cannot be as it is in contemporary dutch with Liefde/Love. (And I doubt the author would not be aware that Liebe could become something like Liewe in Deitsch as the B in standard high German words when near the end of a word often shifts in dialects and related languages).

Gelb (SHG) -> Geel (NL) Dieb (SHG)-> Dief (NL) Lieb (SHG) -> Lief (NL)

From the article;

The contours of Pennsylvania Dutch words are harder and sharper than English ones. It’s hard to ask for a soft favor. Difficult to communicate affection, impossible to say the word love. We have no distinct word for it. One must use the standard German liebe, obtuse and antiquated in our mouths, or succumb to English, a concession. It is a tongue of commands and directives, probing questions about family relations, occupation in the most literal sense, and of following rules.

It might then have been more correct to specify that in the author's regional dialect this is the case but not in Deitsch generally.

To me as a native dutch speaker and a non-native Platt (Dutch Low German) and Frisian speaker it leaves me with a couple of questions:

If liiwe/liwe/liewe is used in at least some variants of Deitsch; does it's meaning (originally) als mean to convey interpersonal affection? Is liwwe/liwe/liewe still used in the infinitive or even as a noun? As you pointed out it is not common to express feelings so explicitly in the culture/language; so does liiwe/liwe/liewe still have the meaning of showing affection if there was no use for it or did it (re)gain the meaning of the word later on? If some dialects of Deitsch lose some of the gramatical forms of the word liwwe/liwe/liewe or completely stop using is, would it not make sense to use the SHG or English words in it's stead to signify a non-native meaning?

When you start a journey, the time you check in at the access gate is taken as the check-in time for your whole journey with that train company. (You may have to check-in and out if you switch trains and the train you're getting on is from a different company).

So if you check-in at 3.59 pm in the north of the Netherlands, and go to the south to arrive around 7.00 pm in the south of the Netherlands and you only use trains from 1 company (like NS) the whole journey will be considered off-peak hours. Even if by the time you arive in the south the peak-hours will already be over.

Most trains run with NS but some regional lines have Arriva (Deutsche Bahn) or Keolis (SCNF).

Additionally there is a 5 minute grace period in your favor, so if you check-in at 4.04 pm it will stil be off-peak.

And because the whole thing is rather confusing for those not already familiar with the system there you get to do it wrong once a year and get your fine waived if you call the train company.

And yes there's little queues just before 06.25 pm every day of people waiting in front of the check-in gates for their pass to become valid (especially on fridays when the weekend-pass will become valid).

Regardless of the poor security guarentees and or personal disinterest in such a service. I don't think services which offer continuous services should ever have a "lifetime" price. With a lifetime subscription the incentive of the company is to offer poor service, or to stop alltogether when revenue from growth is no longer outpacing operating costs. I'd much prefer it if the $29/lifetime would just be $29 / 4 years instead, it would make me much more secure in onboarding onto your proprietary service as I would feel more secure about it's future existence.

Well there's this press release they would publish a report: https://www.vttresearch.com/en/news-and-ideas/donut-lab-comm... with as author the same name on the digital signature "Petri Söderena" for Organisation "Teknologian tutkimuskeskus VTT" and the chain is attested by "DVV Organisational Certificates - G4E" which is on the EU/EEA trusted list: https://eidas.ec.europa.eu/efda/trust-services/browse/eidas/... (by name and key signature). Looks like a legit VTT document to me.

These damn employees, what are they thinking that they could better their employment and lives. They're a bunch of hypocrites for wanting a better piece of the cake of the billion dollar extremely profitable company they built. Won't someone please think of the poor shareholders? /s

It's an interesting topic, I think a comment could't accommodate all the differences between the labor markets.

I'll say this much, our justice systems in western Europe (with the exception of the UK) are based on civil law you could find more about this on Wikipedia to find sources: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Common_law

When it comes to contractors, yes they have less rights (at-will employment, no PTO, no sick-days etc. etc. etc.) So yes it does side-step labor protections but it's more expensive, also in my country at least contractors are required to get disability insurance and not everyone can be considered a contractor. If a judge finds that a contractor actually more resembles an employer (so not being independent of the company hiring), they will retro-actively be considered an employee. (This has happened with Uber drivers for instance)

Some of the protections employees enjoy over here are:

- Not being fired unless the labor board approves (which required documentation from the employees, and them to follow strict labor rules).

- At least 4 weeks PTO.

- Up to 2 years of continues sick-days, (with a doctors note) (after which you'd get fired and get social security)

- After being fired you'd get 1 month of continued salary for each year you were employed, until you find new work

- Paid Maternity/paternity leave

- The right to bargain for a collective bargaining agreement which allows for additional minimum rights/salaries to be applied to all workers within a field

- The right to ignore your boss after hours unless additional consideration (salary) is offered and time schedules are agreed upon

- The right for employees to have a employee-board whenever there's at least 50 employees within a company/org

- The right for employees to keep their jobs if they become disabled (if possible, judged by the labor board not the employer)

When it comes to costs/salaries, I reckon it'd highly depend on the region/job market/sector.

So? They're employees too, I can handle a bad manager, I can't handle being fired over some bullshit. That manager has a mortgage too, you know?

It's nothing personal, it's business.

We have a justice system based on reasonable interpretation by judges, which is a bit less "strict" literal interpretation of contracts. Mine says "Software development", some collective bargaining agreements have more specific descriptions (to prevent under paying of employees by classifying them as lower salaries jobs).

As a start-up you'd hire contractors which you'd pay a much higher fee for, as these wouldn't have the labor protections of employees.

Salaries for contractors are I guess similar to the US maybe a bit lower, for salaries employees definitely lower than the US (for tech at least).

But then again my rent is cheaper, and my insurances are cheaper too, I get PTO and unlimited sick-days, stuff like that. At the end of the day, if I want to make more money and not have many protections (like in the US) I'd become a contractor. (which does come with some strings attached to prevent employers from hiring normal employees like contractors).

You have a choice over here for both models essentially.

Where I'm from (western europe) we have this, but unironically.

Imagine the horror not having to worry over not being able to pay your mortgage or rent whenever your boss or some power tripping middle manager decided they want you to start juggling bowling pins while riding a unicycle while you were hired to develop software.

Won't someone please think of the poor employers? /s

That's a nice way to say "Do what I tell you regardless of what we agreed your role would be or I fire you".

Talk about toxic, this kind of garbage is why workers need strong labor laws and unions protecting them.

They'd probably make it illegal for cars to drive without passenger in cities like Amsterdam without a taxi license to prevent traffic jams of cars driving around to avoid parking costs.

It doesn't, it also doesn't account for the fact that China has a larger population. The US only has about ~23% of China's population to sustain. GDP/CO2 is a silly metric to compare (No Patrick, selling financial products to increase GDP/CO2 isn't green).

In reality China is just "greener" (in CO2 emission) than the USA if you measure more reasonable metrics like CO2 emission per capita.

From article 4. of the GDPR:

‘personal data’ means any information relating to an identified or identifiable natural person (‘data subject’); an identifiable natural person is one who can be identified, directly or indirectly, in particular by reference to an identifier such as a name, an identification number, location data, an online identifier or to one or more factors specific to the physical, physiological, genetic, mental, economic, cultural or social identity of that natural person;

AFAIK a personal to-do list would be "relating to an identifiable natural person" as the database will have a relation from this data to the account, which will likely have a name, email address or other PII (directly or indirectly).

IANAL

No, you can't pay with any currency like Zimbabwean dollars and expect the EU to force businesses to accept it, no.

But this article isn't about legal tender or how debts can be repaid it's about anti-trust and coupling commodities (like bread, and phones) with exclusive services without a service contract at the moment of purchase.

So Apple is forcing its customers to bundle their phone with their billing platform.

Which should be illegal (as we democratically decided to have these laws), having no choice in services is not a feature it's an additional price to pay for the product and customers legally didn't agree to that simply by buying a commodity phone (no contract, no consideration whatsoever for this additional price).

People should just leave if they don’t like the rules. This is correct, Apple should just get out if they don't like the anti-trust rules of our market.

Afaik after the whole PHPixie scandal, they got backlash but the PSR standards they adopted are still in use.

PHPixie thread: https://groups.google.com/forum/#!topic/php-fig/cjLBp2weYaA

I hate it when companies want to track me and put a pop-up on their first page to ask my permission to do so. I don't care about cookies being placed on my system by my browser and that in and of itself isn't illegal under GDPR, I just don't want to consent to being tracked by corporations for profit or be tracked for profit without my consent.

If companies choose to comply with EU law because they want to do business in the EU that's up to them, they don't have to.

"How to better waste time by using your time less efficiently."

Bad: 0.0005 - Good: 0.9995

Lol, our employees who have access to sensitive data cannot be citizens of: - A country the country our company is based in is currently in war with. - A communist dictatorship known for pressuring its citizens into stealing IP/corporate secrets abroad.

It's not arbitrary banning from foreign countries on your client's request if there's actually good reasons to take precautions with these nation-states.

And why not? They're a private company they can choose to employ whomever they want as long as they're compliant to local labour laws. There's no "due proccess" in business.

"Finally - it actually looks like Gitlab's security practices are truly lacking. That an employee is Chinese/Russian shouldn't be a consideration - the systems should be tight enough to make sure absolutely no-one has access to customer data without consent - and that any actions taken are logged for auditing. Whenever necessary - pass your employees through a background-check. In sensitive (government) scenarios - restrict to employees with government clearance."

Don't improve HR security practices because you're vulnerable in different ways anyways?

If you as a company simply don't trust the government your employees work under, you cannot trust them with sensitive information, even if they're outstanding trustworthy people.

What does afford mean in this context? Does it mean people self-report that they can't afford to go on holiday or does it mean they did not go last time or is it a function of disposable income?

Without knowing the methodology this statistic isn't really that useful at all.

U vraagt, wij draaien: https://www.consumentenbond.nl/sparen-en-beleggen/beleggings... https://www.iex.nl/Column/117156/DeGiro-en-het-risico.aspx https://www.reddit.com/r/DutchFIRE/comments/95kh7m/degiro_no...

EN: DeGiro is a dutch broker which is known for it's low costs, however they can short your stocks unless you're willing to pay an additional fee and they sometimes trade stocks on their own "internal market".

Not only are they green washing, they're also trying to blame the consumer for using their polluting products by telling them they should fly less. Like they're being responsible, but it's just those pesky consumers who can't behave them selfs.

Spare me.

As an EU citizen, language is more than just translation. Free interpreters like Google Translate are very useful but will never be a substitute for learning a foreign language.

Because you're not only learning the language you study, but also the culture, norms, and values of the people speaking the language. One might be able to translate "Gezellig" (Dutch, cozy) of "Fika" (Swedish, afternoon tea) into English, but context and understanding will be lost in the process unless the English listener knows these distinctive words and their meaning within the cultural context.

Dutch and Swedish are still closely related to English by language as well as culture, imagine languages with no relation to English whatsoever; this "lost-in-translation" effect will be more pronounced.

A future universal translator might be incredibly good at translating, but will never be a substitute for human cultural understanding without having to explain every caveat and cultural intricacies to the user.

By all learning English, we can have a shared language, we're all able to understand each other in real-time, without technology, with less cultural ambiguity when interpreting.

And why wouldn't we learn English? Learning a second language is very achievable when you're taught in school as a child, and Engish seems like a good compromise between Romance languages and Germanic languages since English has a shared vocabulary with both.

Finally, I'm of course biased towards learning English, coming from a country where English is a mandatory subject in school. That being said; I assure you that no matter how good the translator; Seinfeld sucks in German.

I'm actually on the fence on article 13, I actually like the fact that commercial operators will be liable for the content on their platform under art. 13. For me, article 11 is way more important, making publishers liable for content on someone else's server, that's just insane.

You can use Mailinator to do this already, you can see all of their inboxes on their website and you can use all of their domains to bypass domain restrictions. For example I might use somethingsilly@bobmail.info and it will be redirected to https://www.mailinator.com/v3/index.jsp?zone=public&query=so...

Blocking "controversial" things is cheaper for social media companies than keeping them up (most of the times); they're not in the business of making a fair and enjoyable platform. They're in the business of selling you: useless subscriptions, paid propaganda, items you once searched but have no interest in or have already bought recently, questionable financial/legal services and of course everything else that would make them even slightly more money.

It's not like Facebook actively wants to choose the things that should be banned, they really do not care. It's just that their analysis shows that they could make more money blocking a few nipples because advertisers will pay more on average, and given the choice a company will chose profit over the wellbeing of their product.

I actually like the EU clamping down on internet companies (although it's far from perfect, to say the least). Companies shouldn't have so much power over society they should be controlled by society or they will just spiral towards money like a paperclip factory AI spiralling towards paperclips.

Why should it be fair that a newspaper is responsible for the public letters and ads they publish, but Facebook should not be responsible for the public's messages and ads they publish just because they don't print on paper but use the internet? If a company makes money off public content, the company should be liable for it. You can't have your cake and eat it too.

Finally, it's not about people "volunteering" to abide by rules of a social media company. If it would be about the user, they would just make a setting and let the users choose for themselves what they do and do not want to see. It is in fact about advertisers dictating rules and internet companies seeing nothing in their way from screwing over their users in order to make more money.

We've seen this before, companies screwing people over to make money when there are no/weak regulations. The internet should be free, but companies generating revenue from it should be regulated.

Not sure if available outside the Netherlands, however there's a version on the NPO 3 website with 16:9 aspect ratio: https://www.npo3.nl/followme/22-11-2018/VPWON_1291086

Try giving it some more text to work with, with 3 sentences everything is average even with profanity.

Got the invite and looked around for a bit, I'm impressed with this. This actually works very well, the terminal web emulator is especially impressive compared with the things I'm used to seeing.