specifically, compare your wording with the specific wording from the regulation:

Maximum levels

Food with levels of contaminants higher than those specified in Annex I to the regulation may not be sold. These maximum levels cover the edible part of food and also apply to compound, processed, dried or diluted foods, taking into account the appropriate processing factors.

The regulation also lays down the lowest maximum levels for contaminants that are reasonably achievable with good manufacturing practice or good agricultural practice (i.e. ‘as low as reasonably achievable’).

Ban on mixing

Foods complying with the maximum limits may not be mixed with other foods that exceed these limits.

Foods that must be sorted or subjected to other physical treatments to reduce the level of contamination may not be mixed with foods intended for direct human consumption or use as an ingredient in food.

there's no reason for your blatant fearmongering.

you will note that your summary of the regulation is quite disingenuous. establishing the maximum level of contaminants is not an approval, specifically your claim that every step of the supply chain is allowed up to a certain percent of contaminant and as long as nobody notices its “ok” is an obvious malinterpretation.

(this is not how food safety regulations work here.)

you're an american, aren't you?

sigh.

just to note that reportedly the palantir employees are for whatever reason going through a massive “hans, are we the baddies” moment, almost a whole year into the second trump administration.

as i wrote elsewhere, those people need to be subjected to actual social consequences of choosing to work with and for the u.s. concentration camp administration office.

i hereby propose a new metric for a popular publication, the epstein number (Ē), denoting the number of authors who took flights to epstein's rape island. generally, credible publications should have Ē=0. this one, after a very quick look, has Ē=2, and also hosts sabine hossenfelder.

yet another programmer who imagines that having computer science baccalaureate gives him an insight into human biology. sigh.

it's not “hating your post history”, it's just realisation that you're a shitty debatelord and talking to you is waste of time.

at one of the places i worked this kind of data was called assnumbers.

the technical term is either “confabulation” or “bullshit”; “hallucination” is a misleading label coined by the ai pushers.

• ‘at rest’ → we're using filesystem encryption
• ‘in transit’ → we're using TLS

neither is end-to-end encryption, the data is not private to the service provider.