As far as I know (and I’m not 100 % sure), no. You don’t even need to inform users that you use functional cookies. Most likely because these work for the person using your website, not against them (persisting the session, settings, and so on).
The GPL licenses were all written by the free software foundation for the GNU project. But that doesn’t make it less worthwhile to contribute to this cause, too :)
The information returned by whois depends on the registry. For example, most registries for European TLDs basically just show whether the domain is registered (I say “most” because I’m not sure whether it’s actually all or if there are exceptions, but I know .de is like this). In that case, there aren’t even “whois privacy” services available from registrars. For TLDs from other countries or gTLDs, this might vary.
In either case, do note what the other comment says. Whois is not the only way to identify who runs a service.
it returns a lot of information such as registrar name, abuse contact, creation date… even though i paid extra for “whois privacy.”
If you didn’t pay for whois privacy, it would most likely return your actual name, email address, phone number, and home address instead. “Whois privacy” just means your registrar inserts their information into these fields instead, and forwards any mail they might get to you.
Da wird Qobuz schon erwähnt (ehrlich gesagt unerwartet) und dann wird nicht einmal darauf eingegangen, dass man sich Musik dort auch kaufen kann. Ein bisschen schade eigentlich, schließlich umgeht man damit praktisch die Probleme des Streamens, was ja für den Artikel relevant gewesen wäre.
Yeah, that’s the reasonable thing to do. Most uses of tangents are things I do want to see, but it’s still helpful to enable the category in case something comes up in the video I don’t care about.
When I enabled this niche aggressive category I wanted niche, aggressive segments. But on videos that I liked? This has gone too far. This category is censoring jokes, it is suppressing creative voices. I can’t believe there are people out there, making this segments on these works of art. It’s a comedy channel for God’s sake! I get that this category is for jokes but these jokes are FUNNY! These submitters should be banned, as they clearly don’t understand these guidelines. Oh they removed the jokes from LTT? That’s fine their jokes are lame. Hey @sponsorblock@fosstodon.org how do I bulk upvote
GDPR wasn’t what introduced cookie banners, that was the ePrivacy directive which came before the GDPR. Either way, I’d argue cookie banners are an act of malicious compliance with both of these, as I’m pretty sure they were intended to reduce usage of tracking / analytics / other non-required cookies altogether. The annoying banners are, in my opinion, an effort to make people angry at the EU instead of the ad companies.