![](/static/253f0d9b/assets/icons/icon-96x96.png)
![](https://lemmy.world/pictrs/image/c47230a8-134c-4dc9-89e8-75c6ea875d36.png)
European law generally isn’t precedent-based, but the commission already put out a statement saying that “pay-or-okay” models are not GDPR compliant. https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2024-04/edpb_opinion_202408_consentorpay_en.pdf
European law generally isn’t precedent-based, but the commission already put out a statement saying that “pay-or-okay” models are not GDPR compliant. https://www.edpb.europa.eu/system/files/2024-04/edpb_opinion_202408_consentorpay_en.pdf
“In case a gatekeeper does not comply with the obligations laid out in the DMA, the Commission can impose fines up to 10% of the company’s total worldwide turnover, which can go up to 20% in case of repeated infringement.”
That’s been a thing for a while. Bluetooth ones work too
HTTP/3 is yet another thing, unrelated to both of them. Wikipedia has a disambiguation page for the two meanings: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_3.0 https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/04/web-inventor-tim-berners-lee-wants-us-to-ignore-web3.html
Yeah, I’m with you. web3 is the cryptobro blockchain web, while Web 3.0 usually refers to either RFC-based standards or “the state of the modern web” - the post 2.0 era
Web 3.0 ≠ web3
A $13 billion fine does not look like a “cost of doing business” scenario to me.