Air conditioning and touchscreens didn’t alter how cars drove but did revolutionize the driving experience.

Can we please make touchscreens for neccessary functionality illegal, like using phones while driving?

dangerous information

What's that?

and offer criminal advice, such as a recipe for napalm

Napalm recipe is forbidden by law? Don't call stuff criminal at random.

Am i the only one worried about freedom of information?

and it harms the creators and the industry.

This is a lie, this was disproven. It even benefits them.

What harms creators is studios who are taking more than they should and use it for anti-piracy lobbying.

The Davis School District initially removed the Bible from school libraries after a review determined it did include "vulgar" content. But the school board unanimously reversed its decision after a review by an appeal committee determined the text has " significant, serious value for minors which outweighs the violent or vulgar content it contains," the AP reported.

Now to challenge the "significant, serious" value. Truth before law is based on facts, right?

It poses a significant challenge to creative economies worldwide, costing industries billions annually.

Other studies found, that piracy actually increases sales, offsetting the (always oversestimated) loss of revenue.

So, no, that's a lie.

Translation: more and more people overcome their social media addiction and adapt a healthy usage pattern.

the new ad format also doesn't disclose … that it is even an advertisement at all.

Well, that's clearly illegal in most places. Ads have to be somehow identifyable as ads, because of misinformation (ads lie, who thought?). Just wait for the court case.

They threaten to saw the branch they sit on.

Btw, greed and jealousy are cancers that eat the brain.

That you can get rich if you work hard.

You've come from Windows and have brought dangerous expectations.

Red flag, working conditions must be bad.

Every Twitter announcement be like:

Stop executions.

So, uh, collusive behavior?

Google justified this change by highlighting how extensions using the Web Request API could access and modify all the data in a network request, essentially being able to change everything that a user could do on the web (which is pretty scary and problematic when you think about it which is a perfectly valid usecase of a user-installed extension).

on a screwdriver.

Bill does not work with other people.

Sounds illegal to me.

So a knife maker can now forbid me to cut chicken with it?

that contains 63 nuclear isotopes.

the nickel 63 isotopes

AI article?

So Alabama's supreme court can rule on mere belief?

sources of data such as IP address information transmitted via Wi-Fi, ceiling-mounted heat sensors and weight-triggered sensors attached to chairs that can track workplace occupancy levels, executives and technology providers say.

Sorry americans, but your executives are getting paranoid.

Why do people sometimes feel like threatening your live online? Display of strength?

Snap still has users?

Oh, wait. So they misuse a sprawling censorship law for things they don't like from the start?!

We didn't. It has become a stinking pile of layers not even organizations worth hundreds of millions can put together anymore.

Twitter being rebranded to X is pretty big news in the world of tech.

Maybe, but we have seen it now. If every fart of Musk needs a new thread, maybe better to make a Musk group.

Don't rely on online service to save your stuff.

Edit: how can i exclude < and > from being interpreted?

Tl;dr: judge has no clue about tech industry and Google keeps most of the interesting parts and documents of the trial closed to the public, with the argument it would be "clickbait".

Btw, MS stole it.

https://keivan.io/the-day-appget-died/

I see 3 times the same headline. õ.Ô

Too bad, it happened wile the old ToS were active. :p

If you told Musk, that he is causing net loss for the company this way, he would answer " so then the workers need to work harder". He can't be at fault.

They are not wrong.

Weren't adblocker-blockers judged going against gdpr?

Isn't this one pretty old already? I'm sure i saw this on Reddit when it was still usable.

Yeah, can you take a "Veteran cybersecurity expert" who doesn't generally use an adblocker serious?