This is why we prefer to buy physical media, getting a digital with it is nice, but physical is key.

It wasn’t even me was pushing for us to get physical media, it was my spouse. Of course my plex server the house probably helped. But after a few “forever” is only until next month, or shows completely disappearing altogether from any streaming, they started pushing for more physical media.

From the original ruling it sounded like having the even just the sensor in the watch would be infringing. It sounds like these are new watch they are importing, but the article doesn’t make it clear if that is the case.

Sounds like the restraining order should have listed out additional remedies, or maybe even made her the sole owner.

It is like a bunch of the self-driving companies are trying to kill the tech by making the public turn against them.

This is a response to the very bad kids online safety act. See EFF’s post for details on why it is bad: https://www.eff.org/deeplinks/2022/03/kids-online-safety-act-heavy-handed-plan-force-platforms-spy-young-people

EFF’s article is better, but here are some of the details of why it is bad. The effect of kids online safety act will be censorship and tracking of kids online when research suggests that is counterproductive for the age group being added. Would require more detailed tracking of everyone, not just kids. Services likely would need to block certain content from everyone to reduce liability to a reasonable level. They would potentially be liable if kids got access to content even when it wasn’t for kids no matter how the kids got access (lying, using someone else’s account, bypassing filters, etc.). Content to be blocked is vague and open to be interpretation by the most conservative people in the US, which is obviously problematic. The previous COPPA needs updating, but the version of kids online safety act has so far been financially flawed.

On Monday, Cisco disclosed that unauthenticated attackers can exploit the IOS XE zero-day to gain full administrator privileges and take complete control over affected Cisco routers and switches remotely.

That seems to be on Cisco in this case.

Yes it will. Just like doing the exact same thing for power and phone lines to every single place in the entire US ran prices up. Difference is we paid for it and enforced companies do to it. For internet access we just paid for it and then never made them provide the internet access to everyone everywhere.

And the country should fix this just like during electrification and running phone lines to everywhere.

In the US we paid for internet to be run everywhere (like we did for electricity and phone lines), then the phone companies just didn’t do it. Neither congress nor FTC followed through with any consequences for companies not doing this. So here we are in the US.

Over a long enough term it will be worth it.

But as a said elsewhere neither electricity nor phone being run to rural US homes was cost effective for companies. So the US decided that was shit and paid for it to get done. Started to do the same for internet access. Phone companies refused, used the money for other purposes, inflated prices faster the inflation, etc. and yet neither FTC nor congress held them accountable. Other countries have done the same thing for power and phone, there is nothing fundamentally different about physical internet access stopping anyone from doing the same thing.

Neither was running phone lines or electricity in the rural US, but we did it anyway because it was better for the country.