I agree. One point that is often missed is that those same executives were financially incentivised for Horizon to work by having their £1m+ bonuses tied to it.
They need to be held accountable and jailed if found guilty.
The red line indicates the hard shoulder but yes, even after the law change here in UK I have not seen much actual change on the road tbh regarding middle-lane hogging.
People are either ignorant, lazy or don't care as there is very little chance of being caught.
Who said anything about an empire?
That is obviously not going to work and is not what the EU is.
The EU is far from perfect but is an early iteration of a workable model. I can’t see this happening even in somewhere with a pretty similar societal model as the US currently as the political siuation is so polarised.
In UK it is not even a requirement for an ISP to keep those records but that is not the topic to address, so who is able to legally obtain that data and is it something that you are reasonably likely to do?
You can see why people err on the side of caution.
The CJEU decided that a dynamic IP address will be personal data in the hands of a website operator if:
there is another party (such as an ISP) that can link the dynamic IP address to the identity of an individual; and
the website operator has a "legal means" of obtaining access to the information held by the ISP in order to identify the individual.
On the facts, if the BRD has the legal power to compel the relevant ISP to disclose sufficient information to identify Mr Breyer, then Mr Breyer's IP address will be personal data in the hands of the BRD.
The CJEU also did not ask the specific question in that case - Were the BRD LIKELY to identify Mr Breyer? If this is something that you have never done before or will do in the future then it is not likely that you will try to identify someone by their IP.
It is quite easy really. If you are not able to identify a person by IP it is not PII. It MAY be PII for ISPs for example if they are able to associate the IPs to customers so they would have to treat it as such.
Same here. I ran an rt-66n for years on advanced Tomato until updates stopped.
I moved to OPNSense on a APU2 which is fine for my current connection speed (80/20mbit).
I have an APU2 as the primary OPNSense router at home and picked up an HP T6xx thin client as a backup. There are a lot of small, low powered x86 boxes that will run OPNSense well but it is pretty common knowledge so prices have risen.
The current goto is commercial display PCs with multiple NICs otherwise there are some great micro PCs e.g. Qotom.
If there was a risk to the aircraft, do you think that safety point would be left to the passenger to turn off the device? Of course not so if there was any risk at all of them being used they would not have been allowed on the aircraft.
They need to be held accountable and jailed if found guilty.