> Office.EU is a service offered and operated by EUfforic Europe BV, registered with the Dutch chamber of commerce under registration number 98746243 and having its address at Dr. Kuyperstraat 10-A at (2514 BB) The Hague, the Netherlands.
"fuite" is french which means to escape, to flee. Flight is only in context of planes or flying transportation.
As for the sense of it, you're right, it's either do something, go away, or do nothing.
(of a linguistic form) commonly used in an earlier time but rare in present-day usage except to suggest the older time, as in religious rituals or historical novels. Examples.
thou; wast; methinks; forsooth.
Its usage isn’t extinct, but it is far less common than it used to be and IS largely extinct in casual day to day speech. We would say flee, run away, escape, or any of a dozen other things more often than “flight”
Since my mother tongue is french, I guess I didn't choose the proper english word. In the context of an attack we sometimes see the "fight or flight" response. But I don't know what is the best term to translate "fuite" in this context.
"Flight" is used in English to mean "an act of fleeing". It's perhaps less common outside of specific idioms ("fight or flight" being one of them, yes), but people will generally understand you correctly in context. It seems from the rest of the comments that GP is also not a native English speaker.
I recently bought a Tuxedo InfinityBook Pro 15 [1] which has 2 USB-C ports with one being USB 4 (equivalent to Thunderbolt4), 3 USB-A, 1 Ethernet, 1 HDMI, 1 audio jack and 1 SD card reader.
I'm very much happy with the laptop and its build quality.
But most of all, I love the flexibility to not be stuck with just 2 USB-C and needing dongles/docks. I can have them if I want to, but I don't need to rely on them.
I think you don't need to compromise: laptops do exist that can have everything.
And then the customers will open support requests for code generated by an AI that misuse that very SDK. It doesn't look like OP's issue is with the code per say, only with the lack of skills of its customers, regardless of the code they write...
At the very least, GitHub Copilot will have an easier time with an SDK loaded into context than an API documented only on the web. If the customers are using typescript then they'll have some red squiggles that at least some of these people will bother to read prior to asking for help. The uninformed consumer of OPs API will probably be more comfortable to work with an SDK instead of writing their own clients.
The way I see it is that OP can either complain about customers being annoying, which will happen whether or not OP does anything about his problem, or OP could proactively produce something to make their product better for the demographic they're targeting. At this point it's pretty clear that the users would rather be helped than help themselves, so meeting them where they're at is going to be more productive than trying to educate them on why they suck at both coding and asking for help (or free work).
I don't really know how to point this out without sounding rude and obnoxious, which is not my intention, but it's "per se" (Latin for by itself), not "per say".
And yet Thib, mentioned in the article, does say in an another comment that they are employed by Element but working for The Foundation, making it quite hard to know the difference between the two: https://hackernews.hn/item?id=39369239
If you dig a bit, I'm sure you'll find this is true for quite a bit of the people either in Element or in The Foundation.
It's hardly a secret that most people working on/for Matrix are employed by Element.
https://matrix.org/about/ has a list of names for the "guardians" of the foundation (whatever that may mean exactly) which consist of 40% Element, 60% external parties. The core spec team at the bottom links to Github profiles, from which I believe 8 out of 10 people work for Element (though I'm not 100% sure if the last person in the list still works for them based on his Github profile tag).
Thib isn't part of the foundation, he's just part of the business side, and quite a public part at that. I think his role is a good example of the distinction between Matrix and Element.
I can only be happy to see that the research we made and the documents [1] we produced some months back have lead to changes that improve privacy in Matrix. It is a huge win for our nonprofit Libre Monde [2].
We are especially happy to see you will now be lawfully processing GDPR Access requests by keeping the scope tight, and no longer include the full account history, confirming our statements in the Part 2 of the research that it was indeed unlawful to do so, and will inform the ICO accordingly.
Hopefully the remaining points in terms of privacy will be addressed!
> "It's so commonly used exactly because it's a very simple one-size-fits-all approach".
ICO says this [1] about choosing a lawful basis: "You must not adopt a one-size-fits-all approach. No one basis should be seen as always better, safer or more important than the others, and there is no hierarchy in the order of the list in the GDPR."
Because our document could be collected and processed illegally under GDPR. That the operator makes the conscious choice to have their name listed on their own organisation's website they are from is their own choice. Their organisation is processing their data, not us. They have the right to object to that, and the right to erasure of their personal data if having their name is listed.
They were not given the choice to be part of our publication and therefore, we have no lawful basis to use their name since 1) they did not give us consent and 2) they would not have understood (we didn't say) nor expect (it was a private chat) that we will use their personal data - making Legitimate Interest not possible.
The only way we could be GDPR compliant for being Accountable and not break a lawful basis was to not use their name but the name of their role under their obligations towards us, and linking to the blog post instead (Accountability of what we claim).
Still doesn't seem necessary to point out that it was the same person writing the blog post, could have just said New Vector released this blog post around the same time. Just seems underhanded, but that isn't much surprise coming from someone with a clear vendetta against NV because you want people to switch to Grid. These papers are nothing more than marketing documents for your fork.
I guess then New Vector is actually our best sponsor: they always give us those very important things to write about, like a personal data breach that has a federation-wide scope.
They certainly are generous! I'll ask them to renew our contract!
Thank you for bringing our "failing out", which has an impact on the Personal Data leak itself, so I really hope people will look into it.
As for "with the general matrix community", I believe the amount of projects and people we talk to, and still are in rooms with (which are public) will be the proof of that.
I hope you'll enjoy the read, since we believe this is not the first data leak of this kind and that your personal data might very well have been leaked if you're a Matrix user.
> Office.EU is a service offered and operated by EUfforic Europe BV, registered with the Dutch chamber of commerce under registration number 98746243 and having its address at Dr. Kuyperstraat 10-A at (2514 BB) The Hague, the Netherlands.
[1]: Link to PDF, no HTML version: https://hel1.your-objectstorage.com/officeeuaa001/officeeu-p...
reply