donaltroddyn
That honestly doesn't fit our data or my experience. In our scanning, about 60% of the misconfigured sites had a CMP with blocking active but one or two tags bypassing consent controls
Generally those misconfigurations aren't valuable to the business. We don't see for example lots of ad targeting and conversion tracking firing without consent on an otherwise compliant site.
What we do see is things like sites with CMPs generally working, but one or two analytics events tags firing because consent wasn't properly added to a trigger, or embedded Youtube cookies set without consent, or unexpected data from a URL or query param being accidentally ingested by tracking, or devs adding performance monitoring or observability tools to applications without realising the compliance implications
There's not much business logic in paying for a CMP, blocking your own ad stack, but then letting three analytics events pass through
> FWIW, this was a problem long before LLMs were a thing, and it didn't get worse with LLMs.
This isn't supported by our experience. In the last 18 months, we've seen a big increase in ungated tracking that we catch in CI (albeit with overall much higher velocity in general). LLMs will happily add non-compliant tracking to sites, often following defaults that might be acceptable in the US but not EU. If you push back, they'll also happily implement compliant tracking, but it's definitely not the natural default you can rely on
But your comment left me curious, so I just ran an experiment via Codex -p (gpt-5.6-sol) and Opus 5 via Bedrock
Codex returned the vendor quickstart on 5 of 5 neutral prompts. It gated properly when told the company is Irish, with full Consent Mode v2 defaults denied, GA4 only mounting after consent, with a reject button
So models can produce compliant/non-compliant code based on the context you give them, which reflects what we've seen in industry
Our business is giving devs and increasingly LLMs efficient tests to check the tracking they add is as expected for the EU and then providing signed evidence packs that prove that behaviour at a given time
My company scanned 209 European regulated sites in June, and roughly 7 in 10 had tracking that wasn't correctly gated by consent. It's rarely indifference, though. DPOs in the EU hold too much weight for that. It's usually a tag added that was never wired into the CMP or something added by a dev or LLM without going through proper review
Full disclosure: I run https://consentmark.com, which measures what tags actually fire under each consent state to create evidence packs companies can show regulators
> Currently, the stethoscope resulting from this project functions as well as the market gold standard, the Littmann Cardiology III
If this is true, it's a major achievement.
A recent iPhone will wipe the floor with any webcam I've come across, short of an SLR or mirrorless camera.
Unless auto manufacturers are required to fit much more secure odometers, I can't see them in their current incarnation used as the basis for a tax.
Odometers can have their values changed at will, at least in ICE vehicles, often for valid reasons.
Also, on safety, I don't know the statistics, but subjectively, electricity feels much more dangerous in the US because of the plug and socket design.
A company may verify the identify of a person making a deletion request for data processed under a valid legal basis, which seems unlikely to be the case here.
Which misunderstanding of blockchains/merkle trees do you believe has caused the argument above to be incorrect?
The system as described in the patent provides no protection that I can see against voter coercion, and in some embodiments, allows a voter to verify that their vote has been counted as cast, which is significantly more ripe for abuse than in-person or even postal voting.
I did read your other comments in this thread, but it seems to me that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of blockchain technology and the problems that it can solve. Your proposed right-to-vote token solution is worse in every way than paper ballots cast in-person at polling stations with private areas, counted by hand in publicly observable count centres.
The same type of risk applies to postal voting, although with less severity, as with postal voting there is only one opportunity to check the coerced vote. Blockchain based votes can be checked after the fact.
Still, for this reason, postal voting is rare, and most countries that allow it do so only for citizens living abroad or who cannot travel to a polling station die to injury or illness.
Countries like the UK and Australia that allow any eligible voter to do so by mail are rare.
The app has been open sourced by the Irish Government, not Nearform who were the developers. The copyright is owned by the HSE (the Irish public health authority).
The app being open source does benefit Nearform, though, as they can sell their services customising the app for other governments.
In contrast, our nearest neighbour scrapped their app last month after spending over £11MM (~€12MM) and are now rebuilding on the Apple/Google API: https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-53095336
The code is already up on GitHub: https://github.com/HSEIreland
The 149th and 199th Fighter Squadrons are ANG and fly the F-22A.
AMP's documentation seems to indicate that the LTS is stable only for one month (new features released via the same URL each month), and so is not compatible with SRI (see https://github.com/ampproject/amphtml/blob/master/contributi...)
You can specify a version (ie, https://cdn.ampproject.org/rtv/somenum/v0.js), but the AMP validator complains about that.