Indeed, this seems to be exactly the area where the Data Act could be used to regain access. Unfortunately it seems that it's not possible to directly sue (e.g.) Volkswagen to get access, unlike the GDPR where you have direct standing under article 79 [1].
There doesn't seem to be much written about enforcing the Data Act, so I looked at the regulation directly. Article 39 [2] seems to require to first lodge a complaint with the competent authority as designated by the member state of your residence. Then when that authority invariably fails to act – I have no idea which timeframe we're talking about here – you can "in accordance with national law, either have the right to an effective judicial remedy or access to review by an impartial body with the appropriate expertise". But then you are suing that authority, and not the company directly (edit: I was originally unsure about who to sue under article 39, but 39(3) does clarify that it is the authority).
I would very much like to be wrong about this. I can imagine Muñoz vs. Superior Fruiticola applies [3] ("it must be possible to enforce that obligation by means of civil proceedings"), but I'm not at all sure, and it's a much weaker route than the one which the GDPR explicitly describes.
Would anyone know or have better references on how to enforce the Data Act, preferably individually?
The hoops the EU goes through to be both a federal and also not a federal entity at the same time is crazy
Just let the EU enforce these laws like the US DOJ or FTC would. If I had to file a complaint with the Alabama FCC or the Mississippi Federal Reserve to get relief under federal regulations I would quite simply not bother
Hard pass. I think it’s fair, less corrupt, and more interesting that the Belgian DPA rules over Belgian privacy complaints.
We might argue they will produce better/worse results than another DPA. Okay. But the whole point of much EU policy is that the member states preside over stuff themselves. That seems better than a (more) centralised bureaucracy.
But the EU is incredibly bureaucratic. I'm not saying the US is perfectly functional, especially recently, but a lot of the processes involved here are incredibly Byzantine to accommodate enforcement not being at the top
I'm not quite sure why all that swapping is necessary. I really does age your SSD quite fast considering the enormous memory bandwidth required. Gemma 4 31B at 4-bit quantization should only be around 19 GiB [1], not 28.4 GiB. I'm not feeding it images regularly, so I'm not sure how much memory it needs to get those into context, but I can't imagine it is more than 10 GiB.
The activity monitor does show all kinds of Electron apps active, on top of a presumably model-loaded Handy and a virtual machine for Claude Code, so I guess that's the real root cause for all the swapping. If your laptop starts trashing I can't imagine you have any use for those apps, which will grind to a halt.
So you made this change completely invisible to the user, without the user being able to choose between the two behaviors, and without even documenting it in the (extremely verbose) changelog [1]? I can't find it, the Docs Assistant can't find it (well, it "I found it!" three times being fed your reply with a non-matching item).
I frequently debug issues while keeping my carefully curated but long context active for days. Losing potentially very important context while in the middle of a debugging session resulting in less optimal answers, is costing me a lot more money than the cache misses would.
In my eyes, Claude Code is mainly a context management tool. I build a foundation of apparent understanding of the problem domain, and then try to work towards a solution in a dialogue. Now you tell me Anthrophic has been silently breaking down that foundation without telling me, wasting potentially hours of my time.
It's a clear reminder that these closed-source harnesses cannot be trusted (now or in the future), and I should find proper alternatives for Claude Code as soon as possible.
I recently bought a second hand eight year old 4K LG TV. Pretty cheap too. All models running webOS 3.x and 4.x are trivially rootable as LG never provided an update against DejaVul [1]. There's a handy website to check which models are rootable [2]. You can write directly to the (old!) Wayland socket; haven't tried a libwayland yet that is compatible.
IIRC the last public exploit for all LG TVs for webOS > 5 was in the beginning of 2025 (so pretty recent), but as most sellers on the second hand market have auto-updates turned on, there's no way to know which TVs are vulnerable.
It should be doable to strip down much of webOS with root access. It's nice that webOS in general is very well documented and much is implemented around the Luna service bus. LG offers a developer mode for non-rooted TVs, and there's an active homebrew community because of it. It's a pity that you can't modify the boot partitions, as the firmware verifies their integrity. It would be nice to have an exploit for that.
Not restricted to Apple, but TIL: Double-clicking on a word an keeping the second click pressed, then dragging, allows you to select per word instead of per character.
As you have so much RAM I would suggest running Q8_0 directly. It's not slower (perhaps except for the initial model load), and might even be faster, while being almost identical in quality to the original model.
And just to be sure: you're are running the MLX version, right? The mlx-community quantization seemed to be broken when I tried it last week (it spit out garbage), so I downloaded the unsloth version instead. That too was broken in mlx-lm (it crashed), but has since been fixed on the main branch of https://github.com/ml-explore/mlx-lm.
I unfortunately only have 16 GiB of RAM on a Macbook M1, but I just tried to run the Q8_0 GGUF version on a 2023 AMD Framework 13 with 64 GiB RAM just using the CPU, and that works surprisingly well with tokens/s much faster than I can read the output. The prompt cache is also very useful to quickly insert a large system prompt or file to datamine although there are probably better ways to do that instead of manually through a script.
> That too was broken in mlx-lm (it crashed), but has since been fixed on the main branch
Unfortunately I have got zero success running gemma with mlx-lm main branch. Can you point me out what is the right way? I have zero experience with mlx-lm.
It is, as I'm running it; it has been added this week. As I said I'm running the main version from Github and doing nothing special, see: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47761308
Not necessarily, but most inverters (in Europe, at least) aren't designed to function without a grid anyway.
Some models of inverter brands like Victron (which isn't very common outside its niche of self-sufficiency because they are rather expensive and sometimes complex) can form a micro-grid. They have the option of a special circuit breaker [1] that decouples the inverter from the grid if the grid is detected to be down, which allows their use during a power outage.
You say "tax money", but this project isn't a government project or using public money at all. As for contributing back to Nextcloud: there is a long list of Nextcloud partners [1] that contractually obligated themselves to contribute back to Nextcloud for every user they onboard. The company in this article has not.
This is just a Nextcloud rebrand with a confusing domain name. It claims "Core is [100%] Open Source" but no source code is provided beyond what's already available in the upstream projects, and it's unlikely that there will be (as this happens a lot). It's a one-man project without a track record or certifications based out of a shared office space [1].
And don't get me wrong: there's nothing wrong with starting a business rebranding Nextcloud and keeping your development closed source, as long as you're honest about that, which this initiative is not.
If you're looking for a Nextcloud hoster, there's a long list of partners here [2] that have contractually obligated themselves to contribute back to Nextcloud for every user they onboard.
> there's nothing wrong with starting a business rebranding Nextcloud and keeping your development closed source, as long as you're honest about that, which this initiative is not.
I thought Nextcloud was released under the AGPL, making this very much not okay by default. So either I misunderstood something or Office.eu got a permission to make non-free modifications? (Going by what you said; I have not dived into this.)
If it just says that it is partly based on Nextcloud, that does not imply they modified Nextcloud code at all. Other parts of the platform could be based on some other code, even closed one.
reply