We have known for more than a decade now that training machine learning models on huge user data sets allows to predict a lot of things with decent accuracy.
Twitter has been gathering a lot of data on all of its user, it is expected them to be able to predict interests like (and much more) this if you use their service.
No need to spy on your smartphone beside what you submit willingly https://hbr.org/2012/09/use-big-data-to-predict-your-c
I believe you should Google that kind of stuff instead of trying to make it a debate in comments. There is no single right move about what to do with the money, but governments are spending billions (including those from these fines) to build their countries https://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Government_expenditure_on_general_public_services
Lol you make it look like the government is keeping the money. The population is benefitting from fines imposed on companies violating the law, what's odd about this?
I think it's more likely that you come of as disingenuous given that you come here to parrot some very well known talking points that are plain fallacies aimed at painting nuclear in a negative way.
Meanwhile, we are getting slow cooked and a lot of people here probably feel the impact of the heat and the urgency of the situation.
I thought about it when typing it, but I carried the habit from reddit over to lemmy to consider someone beginning a chain of comments as OP.
It's definitely not the original meaning, but I saw it fairly common to use OP to refer to the author of an initial comment when responding to one of its child comment.
Your last point is the most important one in my opinion. OP implied we have to chose between nuclear and solar/wind but it's plain false.
Probably because it's not newsworthy as it's systematic, for instance Facebook and Googke have had to pay ever ibcreasing fines for GDPR violation, now exceeding a billion dollar, and get in line with the regulation, or get forbidden to opperate in the EU.
They have been getting those fines for years with a delay of a couple of months to pay them. They would have been barred from the EU long ago if they had not paid them.
I already had when I posted.
For instance this clearly says that regular clothing is perfect for sun protection of you don't go for something too bright. https://www.skincancer.org/skin-cancer-prevention/sun-protection/sun-protective-clothing/
My point is not that it's not weird at all, it's that in addition to quoting completely false numbers, you put forward a comparison that makes absolutely no sense. The numbers compared are not "weird" or "not weird", they are absolutely not comparable.
Unfortunately your comparison still makes no sense, you are comparing the proportion of fuel coming from a location to the proportion of the population that benefits from a service that use the fuel in question.
Really not meaningful 😅
I don't see the difference with regular clothing, which also basically offers excellent protection from the sun?
The technique they use does not really change to the issue.
It's also not necessarily more secure than third party cookies like you claim? You can refuse those cookies and not all website use them, while all website ends up in browsing history.