News:

Welcome to Wittenberg!

Main Menu

Recent posts

#11
Quote from: ServescDelDomnul on Yesterday at 08:12:34 PMHow did the word for "language" become "glheþ" and not something like "lhenga"? Is it of Amazigh origin?

From Welsh iaith/Breton yezh.
#12
I will not repeat the points I have already raised in response to the Secretary of State's original post on this matter, but I will follow up by saying the following.

First, the Secretary of State must comply with the law, but what I think has been forgotten in this discussion is that "the law" also includes the UK and EU GDPR legislation. The current database clearly contains the personal data of citizens who live in the EU and the UK, and my assumption is that the Secretary of State also resides within the EU. This means the GDPR applies in practice, regardless of Talossa's own internal status or legislation.

Part of the GDPR is that consent to share personal data can never be given unknowingly. Consent must be specific, informed, and freely given. The burden lies with the data controller, in this case the Secretary of State, to be able to demonstrate that each data subject was informed and freely gave consent for a specific type of data sharing. If there is any uncertainty about this, or if the Secretary of State believes that citizens may not have been fully aware of how their data was being shared, then the correct legal position is to assume consent was not given and the data should not be shared.

If a citizen consented for their data to be used by the Chancery to forward electoral communications, that cannot be taken to mean they also consented for their email address to be disclosed to third parties. We have no clear record that they opted in to such sharing as described in El Lex D.8.5.4.

Therefore, the core issue is whether the Secretary of State (allegedly) breaches GDPR obligations by complying with his interpretation of El Lex, or whether he recognises that GDPR, as binding law on anyone processing the data of EU or UK residents, must take precedence over Talossan law in matters of personal data protection. My own position remains that opt-in consent cannot be validly given if the data subject was not fully aware of how their information would be used.

Another concern is the potential for data misuse under the current system. As it stands, I could theoretically register a party tomorrow and, as a party leader, gain access to the database. There is nothing to prevent me from saving that information in an unencrypted spreadsheet on a personal laptop and keeping it indefinitely. Worse still (and there have been incidents of this in the past), I could then send a group email using the "To" field instead of "BCC", exposing every recipient's address to everyone else on the list. At that point, every person could download or copy those addresses and store them however they liked, completely outside the control of the Chancery. That would constitute a serious data breach under GDPR principles, and those affected would have little to no effective recourse.

Thus, getting back on the topic at hand, my ideas for reform would be twofold.

  • Bring Talossan law in line with GDPR requirements.
    This would remove the conflict between the two systems. There should be clear opt-in and opt-out choices, with data subjects properly informed about how their information will be used, stored, and shared. Data should be encrypted, password protected, and automatically deleted after a set period. Citizens should also have the right to see what data is held about them and who has viewed or shared it.
  • Limit party leaders' access to personal data.
    Ideally, leaders should not be able to see individual citizens' details. A shared email system could be created, such as citizens [at] talossa (dot) com, which distributes messages to consenting recipients without revealing their contact information. Bouncebacks or automatic replies could be routed to a no-reply address to avoid exposing anyone's data. This would achieve the same purpose of communication without compromising privacy or compliance.


My two bence on a quiet Saturday morning, 

-- Litz
#13
El Glheþ Talossan / Etymology of “Glheþ”
Last post by ServescDelDomnul - Yesterday at 08:12:34 PM
How did the word for "language" become "glheþ" and not something like "lhenga"? Is it of Amazigh origin? The Översteir doesn't mention etymologies, so I need some clarification. Thanks.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#14
El Glheþ Talossan / Re: Translations of holy books...
Last post by ServescDelDomnul - Yesterday at 08:08:34 PM
I might try to make a translation of the 76-book Orthodox canon if God leads me to do so, but only He knows...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
#15
Wittenberg / Re: Talossan Pirate Radio?
Last post by Joesaurus - Yesterday at 07:12:20 PM
I'm actually working on getting my Ham radio license. Do we know if there's any effort to get a Talossan ham radio group together? I know one exists for Esperanto
#16
Green Party / Re: Green Party Statement: Ret...
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - Yesterday at 06:33:13 PM
Quote from: Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC on Yesterday at 05:21:10 PM"our newest member @Carteir Montagnhă "

x doubt

Not sure what this reply means but glad to see you around these parts, Miestra.
#17
Wittenberg / Re: Talossan Pirate Radio?
Last post by Breneir Tzaracomprada - Yesterday at 06:32:03 PM
Quote from: Iason Taiwos on Yesterday at 05:48:57 PMI recently purchased what I initially thought was a set of walkie talkies. I live kind of out in the sticks, and cell phone service is spotty (and frequently goes out altogether.) My wife has health issues, so I thought a set of walkie talkies would be a way for us to get ahold of each other when the phones crap out. God forbid she has a health emergency when the phones are down and I'm away from home.
Well, what I got are actually a set of portable Ham radios. In the USA, you have to take a test and get a license to be able to talk on the Ham bands. They are not walkie talkies. If you talk on them without a license, you have broken the law, and could possibly have the FCC come down on you. (There's no laws against just listening to anything on the Ham bands.)
My wife wasn't happy about this. "So you just bought a couple of radios we can't use without getting a license?!" Sadly, yes. But, this is Admiral Taiwos! I am a rebel, a maverick! So, I broke the law and used the Ham radio as a walkie talkie. Talked to my wife for under a minute while she was in the house and I was on the porch feeding one of the neighborhood's stray cats. (The radio worked fine.)
Then, on a whim, I clicked the "talk" button and said "Hail to the King! Long Live Talossa!"
I doubt anyone heard me besides my wife. I've been doing research on Ham radio ever since I got these things. Apparently there are only seven licensed Ham radio operators in my area, and I doubt any of them happened to be tuning in to me when I shouted my Pro-Talossa slogan.
Nonetheless...could this be considered Talossan pirate radio? Has the Admiral become a pirate of the airwaves? Has anything remotely Talossan ever been broadcasted over radio waves?
I may try to get a legit Ham license.
I could get one of those FM radio transmitters and start a Talossan radio station, but the only people who might pick it up are whoever happens to drive past my trailer.

Sounds fantastic, I am still interested in helping with the Talossan Naval Relief Corps, Admiral.
#18
Wittenberg / Talossan Pirate Radio?
Last post by Iason Taiwos - Yesterday at 05:48:57 PM
I recently purchased what I initially thought was a set of walkie talkies. I live kind of out in the sticks, and cell phone service is spotty (and frequently goes out altogether.) My wife has health issues, so I thought a set of walkie talkies would be a way for us to get ahold of each other when the phones crap out. God forbid she has a health emergency when the phones are down and I'm away from home.
Well, what I got are actually a set of portable Ham radios. In the USA, you have to take a test and get a license to be able to talk on the Ham bands. They are not walkie talkies. If you talk on them without a license, you have broken the law, and could possibly have the FCC come down on you. (There's no laws against just listening to anything on the Ham bands.)
My wife wasn't happy about this. "So you just bought a couple of radios we can't use without getting a license?!" Sadly, yes. But, this is Admiral Taiwos! I am a rebel, a maverick! So, I broke the law and used the Ham radio as a walkie talkie. Talked to my wife for under a minute while she was in the house and I was on the porch feeding one of the neighborhood's stray cats. (The radio worked fine.)
Then, on a whim, I clicked the "talk" button and said "Hail to the King! Long Live Talossa!"
I doubt anyone heard me besides my wife. I've been doing research on Ham radio ever since I got these things. Apparently there are only seven licensed Ham radio operators in my area, and I doubt any of them happened to be tuning in to me when I shouted my Pro-Talossa slogan.
Nonetheless...could this be considered Talossan pirate radio? Has the Admiral become a pirate of the airwaves? Has anything remotely Talossan ever been broadcasted over radio waves?
I may try to get a legit Ham license.
I could get one of those FM radio transmitters and start a Talossan radio station, but the only people who might pick it up are whoever happens to drive past my trailer.
#19
Wittenberg / Re: [Royal] Milwaukee Magazine...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC - Yesterday at 05:39:48 PM
I note that the incident where Ben tried to reclaim his citizenship, then abruptly gave up when we asked for an indication that he'd learned anything from his experience, isn't mentioned :D
#20
Wittenberg / Re: [CHANCERY] The September 2...
Last post by Miestră Schivă, UrN-GC - Yesterday at 05:33:40 PM
Quote from: Sir Lüc on Yesterday at 08:25:06 AMThe Chancery will comply with both requests it received

All three requests