@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Dave

@Dave@lemmy.nz

This profile is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

One size doesn’t fit all. That’s why all kids should have an hour of reading, an hour of writing, and an hour of maths every day (which takes up like 70% of the learning time available).

Dave, (edited )
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

I don’t know about that guy but you can’t even get cheque books in NZ anymore. They were phased out, mostly because electronic payments are ubiquitous and most places already stopped accepting cheques a decade or two back.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Personally, most stuff is in cloud storage. For local stuff I use syncthing.

But for the average person, I’d expect using iCloud, Google Drive, Onedrive, or Dropbox and then creating a shareable link for the other person.

I also can’t remember the last time I used a USB drive for anything other than installing an OS.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

In NZ we would talk annual salary, rent per week, and we just don’t talk about mortgage payments because it’s easier not to.

I think we probably do annual salary because there isn’t consistency with how people are paid. Weekly and fortnightly are probably the most common, but monthly is pretty normal too and I’ve seen some being paid twice monthly.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Specifically about the DOC part of this, isn’t one direction (the NZ First led one) about the public interacting with the departments in English, where as the Minister’s comments on using te reo were about usage internally within the department?

Despite this, departments and agencies have received no official government directive on the use of te reo and English.

No Government entities have been directed to change their names to English.

A small number of agencies, including the New Zealand Transport Agency Waka Kotaki, have voluntarily opted to change their names in line with the government’s position.

I don’t think this can be true. A government department doesn’t change their name without a Minister’s input, and even if the government provided no “official” advice, if the government’s (very public) position is the name should be English and the Minister supports that then how can they say no? I’d probably put money on it that it didn’t feel voluntary to them.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Wasn’t this policy what NZ First campaigned on?

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

But can’t the site owners just ignore the EU fines? What enforcement power does the EU have?

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Wow, really?

Like I get Apple or Netflix or whatever. They ignore a fine they will just not be allowed to operate in the EU.

But you’re saying the US has laws that say US companies have to follow EU rules?

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Yeah, I guess I’d just like to see some case law or something to back up the idea. Or to know the specific law that says that US companies have to follow EU rules or they can be prosecuted in a US court.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

I did. The best I’ve found is that US companies have to follow GDPR because it says it’s reach is international, and this has never been tested in court. Any specific cases are always related to big tech which EU courts can hurt, as far as I can tell there has never been any test of the reach for a site like in the OP.

Dave, (edited )
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Sorry but I went off on a thread with someone else and now I really need to know what this is based on. As far as I can tell, GDPR’s international reach has never been tested, there is no specific legislation I can find, and any companies big enough for the EU to care also operate in the EU so can be hurt by EU courts (as in, pay the fine or no more Facebook in Europe).

I’m being down voted to hell for asking a question but I still want some confirmation of the answer backed up by something.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Thanks for providing this, I wasn’t able to find it through my own searches. I’m reading the linked documents, and can’t find anything to back up that the US courts will enforce the foreign fine. In fact, this is specifically addressed in the document and it seems to support that they will not support it.

C. The rule against recognition of foreign fines and penal judgments

The general rule in favor of recognizing foreign country judgments that meet the foundational requirements above is subject to a key exception: under both the Recognition Acts and the common law, U.S. courts generally do not recognize or enforce foreign judgments for the collection of taxes, fines, or penalties.

Given my original question was why can’t they ignore the fine, it seems the answer is that they can?

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

I’m almost certain that import and export has specific laws written for that case, considering how crucial it is to the country. GDPR is a specific new thing less than 10 years old and has no equivalent in US law.

Sorry, I may have given the impression that I mean I was questioning if there are any laws that control how interactions with other countries work. In fact my question was if there are generic laws that say “when Europe introduces some new law, the US has to follow it”.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Thanks! Feels a little like the exception that proves the rule though 😅

If you see the chain here (sorry, lemmy has no good way to link to a comment - here is a lemmyverse.link link for redirecting to it in your instance), it seems US courts generally follow (but are not obliged to follow) court orders from other countries where there is a similar law in the US. So it’s likely now that California courts would uphold rulings in relation to GDPR, but other states probably wouldn’t.

However, there’s a giant caveat in that fines and penalties are specifically excluded (see above chain) so for my original question about whether the site could ignore the fine - well as far as I can tell they can ignore it, because it won’t be enforced by US courts.

That doesn’t rule out other action though. Perhaps a US court would uphold some sort of takedown order, since it’s only fines and penalties that are specifically excluded and the US would likely have other laws (some sort of anti-stalking?) that could be used for the takedown request?

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Woah, $1,300! It looks great but I don’t think I’ll spend that for a first dip into coffee machines!

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Yeah, not really entry level. Plus it looks pretty bug, the other one looks slimmer in terms of bench real estate.

Maybe one day when I win lotto!

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

It’s great to hear they are working for you!

The only thing that currently stands out, and it a tad annoying, is the aids amplify my own voice when I speak. Makes to me my voice sound echoey and louder than I’m used to.

A quick search and it seems it’s normal you’ll probably get used to it, but also there are some specific things that can make it worse so if you have a follow up appointment then mention it then as there might be some adjustments that can help to some minor extent.

I also saw mention of specific hearing aids that you can train your voice on and it filters it out. But I’m assuming they come at a premium.

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

I (almost) always do!

Dave,
@Dave@lemmy.nz avatar

Is chocolate worth eating if it doesn’t have mint?

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • JUstTest
  • kavyap
  • DreamBathrooms
  • thenastyranch
  • magazineikmin
  • osvaldo12
  • khanakhh
  • Youngstown
  • mdbf
  • slotface
  • rosin
  • everett
  • ngwrru68w68
  • Durango
  • anitta
  • InstantRegret
  • GTA5RPClips
  • cubers
  • ethstaker
  • normalnudes
  • tacticalgear
  • cisconetworking
  • tester
  • Leos
  • modclub
  • megavids
  • provamag3
  • lostlight
  • All magazines