Middle Manglement. Don’t forget they have to put their stink on everything to differentiate themselves.

It’s one of the main reasons ideas that do actually work at a c-suite level end up being implemented terribly in the end.

Eh, that’s their software side. Google doesn’t do that with hardware infrastructure like data centers.

To be honest, I’m surprised Google/Alphabet hasn’t tried to get into running their own reactor by this point. Energy seems like the one thing they haven’t touched yet.

Because the owners have grifted all of that away to private accounts already of course.

Phantom Liberty is a great expansion in its own right, combined with the 2.0 changes just made the entire experience better.

But then you can’t sell your customer’s data for profit. Even if you don’t now, you still have that option in the future.

Eh a lot of TOS bullshit is exactly that. And Apple is very far from perfect, especially with anything that could even think of threatening their walled garden. I assume everything Apple does is bad for the consumer, because 99% of the time that’s accurate.

So if I’m reading this correctly, this is only a change in One UI, which Samsung makes, and only affects their devices… So why is Google being sued other than for headlines?

Also, it’s still not blocked, just additional warnings educating users about security, or lack thereof with side loading.

Not really on Epic’s side here honestly.

I mean… This post literally includes the excerpt from the article about why. It’s literally the only thing in the OP other than the link itself.

Amazing what happens with adequate funding. How long until Republicans open some sort of bullshit Congressional investigation that won’t find anything but waste time and money, and as usual try to reduce funding by obviously punitive levels?

Surprisingly fast for a government organization to react to something new.

Oh I’m sure that’s the case for nearly all large social media and network systems based on the US. I’m also willing to bet that for some of these companies, almost no one even knows it’s there, either because a 3 letter agency put it there themselves without being noticed, or an employee implemented it for them without corporate approval.

The US is worried about other countries doing this because we 100% are doing it ourselves. From a national security perspective, it’s basically common sense. Ensure you have access to everything, even if you don’t use it now, you might in the future and it will save time.

A wiretap is different than having something like backdoor access at will for military use.

The problem is that not all of those terminals are being purchased by Ukraine, or supplied through official channels. There are tons of equipment being donated from third parties not directly affiliated, including Starlink terminals.

That’s great if the Ukraine military were the only users in the region, but they aren’t. Regular Starlink service is available in the country, outside military use. Even though the Ukraine military is using it, Starlink is not designed to be a military network. It is a civilian network that just happens to be available and extremely useful in this case, even with the Russian attempts to interfere with signals in the region.

Yeah, but it’s not a government satellite system, it’s an independent Internet provider. It is always possible that the US government/military has access on the back end, but that’s not guaranteed. And since Ukraine is using Starlink, they can’t exactly just disable all access in the region.

Kind of makes sense for Russia to try and use Starlink at least a bit to test the waters and see what sort of Intel the US has access to directly through it.

They do, but Ukraine uses Starlink, so they can’t really disable usage entirely in the contested areas. They could disable the individual terminals, but that would require knowing which ones the Russians were using in the first place.

Not disagreeing, just pointing out it’s not a traditional copyright claim like so many others we see.

Except this isn’t a copyright case. They’re claiming patent infringement.

You know guys, I’m starting to think what we heard about Altman when he was removed a while ago might actually have been real.

/s

It’s also worth it to point out that, for people that care about supporting content creators but don’t want to or can’t afford to do so individually through services like Patreon, Youtube Premium views pay creators far more than a regular view.