For example, a company strives for 90+ world wide market share, even when their product doesn't deserve it. Yet, another form of human stupidity... If they actually achieve that market share, is it really a free market/caveat emptor situation anymore? How many fit that description, currently? Google everything, Microsoft, Adobe, Intuit, John Deere, every auto maker, and on and on... "You can certainly control the world now if you want to, but you better not screw it up." If you think that someone could figure out how to hack Windows bank ATM software (Windows 9, I think) all over the planet, and Microsoft could get away with being not responsible because of an exception clause in the licensing, you're fooling yourself. Someone {gov} would come down hard. TikTok blowing up is one thing. This is something else. The implications here are obvious. If you want the benefit of being big boy, does that imply some liability of wearing big boy pants? Certainly a good debate topic...
Over the years I've noticed the quality of the content in general going down, as we all have. I often wonder if there will be a "critical mass" point where people will just say, "too many commercials with crap in between. Why bother turning on broadcast at all?" I myself have gotten to the point where I turn on YouTube TV, and the commercial break seems to be always underway and so lengthy that I turn it back off and turn on YouTube or Emby.
AT&T has to get those dividends to pay out from somewhere. If you doubt that, look at their consistent dividend history. I suspect there is more then one historical year that the dividend didn't quite match up with P&L performance.
Not only the comments already made about tik tok being mostly a phone app anyway, but many phones have a fallback feature that if data can't be had via Wi-Fi, the phone will automatically try the cellular network.
If all politicians keep thinking this shortsightedly that all their future laws/bans/whatever are this easily and conveniently circumvented, maybe the future is looking brighter after all.
At the bare minimum they should at least advise device makers to have something obvious about changing the default password. The router makers are good about that, but who thinks about changing the password on a fridge?
Title says it all...
Perhaps a good first step for Texas parents would be to flip over all their kids' mattesses and see if there is anything underneath. Oh wait... that's probably just the dad.
Don't you mean the fruit?
I'm skeptical that they would support this, unless they know the CA bill doesn't have the same loopholes as New York. We already know the game console exception is for copyright protection. (Regardless of the fact there is existing anti-circumvention laws on the books.)
It's likely that they [the news sites] will be totally stupid and shut down the screenshots too eventually. Copyright, blah, blah, blah...
What's the point in modifying legislation if the DOJ isn't going to enforce it? One of the major points of the article is the fact that the DOJ isn't going to do anything. Marketing calls are a nuisance, but I'm guessing that from their point of view, they have much bigger fish to fry. What those fish are, I have no idea.
If I was in charge of a local government, I'd have a policy of "If you are the defendant in more than one lawsuit in your career win or lose, you're out." A nice objective standard that blows past any subjective crap.
I think that's a good point. We seem to be doing reasonably well considering the FCC commission can't make any decisions most of the time because nominations are always deadlocked in Congress. When they do have enough people, they're usually just a rubber stamp.
In advertising you always have the particular phrase, download speeds "up to". If the FCC really wants to stick it in and make it hurt, one thing I always thought they should do is, math out what the download speed would be if they utilized the line 24/7, while managing to stay under the data cap. "Sorry, that's the maximum download speed you can advertise. If you don't like it, raise your cap."
Well then, maybe the war on Big Tech is in the wrong place.
My skepticism is not allowing me to be hopeful, even if an amendment passes requiring a warrant for a major data buy. The NSA is going to go to the FISA court to get one anyway. The FISA court signs most anything on blind faith.
Two things, 1) Who thought this was a good idea to start with? 2) Who thought it was a good idea to combine a leftist and a rightist and hope to come up with anything intelligible? It's probably true that the same person is responsible for both 1) and 2). Such concentrated idiocy has to be unique. If it weren't, our species would already be extinct.
I would agree with that...
The bridge/roadway should have been properly blocked off or destroyed.