That still sounds pretty expensive. I live in Europe and pay less than that for a 1000/100 connection.
It may not work, but if Democrats could spin this as ISPs losing money from poor people having to cancel or downgrade their plans if the bill doesn't pass, there's a chance!
The decryption will continue until public safety improves!
Eventually, there’s going to be a car mod that disables the data exfiltration system, and then they won’t be able to sell it anymore.As the other commenter points out, right to repair laws don't legalise carte blanche to mess with the software. But more importantly, I would argue that a mod that disables the data gathering would be more popular, not less.
"Such a nice-looking AI model you have there. Would be a shame if something were to happen to it..."
See, these companies are deciding that your indie studios simply steal their work when cloning popular works of art that the companies spent millions of dollars to create.Are you high or something? Disney's success is literally built on recreating old folk and fairy tales that are in the public domain.
If the markets are deciding that its better to send him DMCA notice than listen his songs, then obviously the material wasn’t original enough for the markets.Right, because DMCA takedowns are never done to videos that are clearly fair use. You absolute crouton.
From what I understand, this is (sort of) how non-competes work in the world of professional wrestlingIt's also how it works in many industries in Europe. Among engineers and even sales people, it's common for them to have a 6-12 month(depending on info sensitivity) non-compete clause with full pay.
How does telling a data company that they either can't sell customer data or has to severely limit the kind of data run afoul of the first amendment?
While it doesn’t solve manipulation/propaganda entirely, it would actually stop it happening via one avenue. Just because it’s not a full solution doesn’t make it ‘fuck all’.It can't stop something there's no evidence of happening. So it does fuck all.
Which would only solve the surveillance half.Which is the only thing there's evidence of.
What’s the difference between those cases?Read the rest of the article, or one of the many other write-ups about this bill.
Those who ban books often cite “obscenity law and hyperbolic rhetoric about ‘porn in schools’ to justify banning books about sexual violence and LGBTQ+ topics (and in particular, trans identities),” the report says.Damn, almost sounds like the researchers looked through the TD comments section for their report.
You make it sound like this political tactic of smashing unrelated things together in a bill is unavoidable. Reactions like yours is exactly why they do it.
So you're okay with government censorship as long as there's a humanitarian upside?
Where’s the acknowledgment of the role of natural forces in the conversation?If there were two causes of a problem, with one being responsible for 90% of it and the other being responsible for 10%, what point is there in acknowledging the 10%?
Evidence of what? Did you miss all the links in the article?
LOL no. There is a causal link between modern industrialization and climate change, unlike the claims of Haidt which are only correlational.
Musk is free to tell Australia to go fuck themselves, but his refusing to take down a video of a knife attack because a government is asking is the wrong time to stand on what he believes is principle.
You are a many things, among them a liar, a gaslighter, but also a COWARD.Every single accusation, a confession.
The bill is not exclusively a Tiktok ban bill, because they knew bundling with a bunch of humanitarian stuff would make it more likely to pass. But it is still very much a Tiktok ban bill.
I'm sure Congress will get right on that. /s
What's the dishonesty?