I can't say I am impressed. Pay to skip the security theater....that needed research?
Seems they could make everyones life a little easier by automatically enrolling eligible people who fly more than certain threshold instead of just monetizing it.
61 publicly visible posts • joined 13 Aug 2019
Depends on what you mean by work. If you mean let Meta and Google etc charge more and resell the reams of data then they're working as intended.
If you mean better match the ad to the person seeing it, I very much doubt they're much more effective.
Research suggests publishers get just 4% more serving targeted versus non-targeted ads, but they're also more expensive.
How about parental responsibility, if you give your kid a smartphone, full access to apps, and unrestricted internet access and zero education on the darker things they might find , you're to blame.
If they're getting addicted and depressed, take it away. Oh sure they'll use their friends to access it, but that's still far less than they would otherwise.
"Let people do what they need to do to make them happy. Mind your own business, and do what you need to do to make you happy."--Leon Brown
"I don't know how people get so anti-something. Just mind your own business, take care of your own affairs, and don't worry about other people so much."--Betty White
Lawyer aren't cheap, but it wouldn't matter. The 1st Amendment is the problem all these think of the children bills have.
It's was what sunk most of the Communications Decency Act and the majority of COPPA. The precedent has been there
for decades, you can't interfere with the constitutional rights of the public and businesses with burdensome and intrusive requirements to protect children.
Clearview is in New York which is where any suit filed to collect would need to be filed. So California's law could be considered, but that's not a sure thing.
This isn't a court decision, it's regulatory meaning it doesn't benefit from uniform foreign money judgment laws in most states. Even if it was, I don't know if it could satisfy the jurisdiction requirements.
They settled with ACLU cause they had Illinois residents pictures and Illinois law enforcement etc as clients. Meaning they violated the biometric privacy law and where doing business in the state.
I don't think it's likely the U.S courts will make them or accept extra-territorial jurisdiction over data scraped from the public internet to enforce fine based on a foreign law.
That's nice, but internet standards are only as good as the willingness of others to follow them. Even if the ITU where by accept NewIP how many non-authoritarian countries are going to seriously adopt it? It will just discredit the ITU even further after their last attempt to hijack the internet.
That's not really going to work. Courts don't care, any company that received trade secrets and other IP from the government and tried to use them would be open to lawsuits in the U.S and abroad.
Considering how government hand outs tend to disappear in a poof of wasteful spending and misappropriation, I think knowing exactly what they intend to do makes good sense. If they don't like it, it's optional unlike the forced technology transfer China used and requirements to partner with local business.
It really depends on what saying no data transfers really means, and who's in power when the decision is made. If it means Google and Facebook can't operate in the EU and you have someone like Trump, it's probably going be more akin to a scorched earth approach with high tariffs on French wine and threatening NATO etc etc and all the tit for tat that goes with it.
Maybe, but Europe passed the law and at least a part of it continues negotiating these agreements knowing they aren't going to hold up to their own law. There is no political will to over haul the laws in the U.S, and expecting the U.S to change it laws cause of the GDPR is wishful thinking. It probably doesn't help tech companies aren't exactly loved in Washington, so they probably don't care if they get fined or get left out of some EU cloud contracts.
U.S LNG is sold at the Henry Hub benchmark price, energy companies like France's Total Energy and other mostly European companies buy it and sell it at a higher prices cause they can, especially in Europe since Russia has largely removed it's self from competition.
Of course Europe got in bed with Russia for cheap gas etc even after Crimea and raise big stink when Trump sanction Nord Stream 2...Whine all you want, you've got no one else to blame. I suspect they'll be making similar mistakes with China, and regretting it when Beijing finally invades Taiwan.
Let's not forget the sovereign debt trap the EU is creating for Ukraine with their loans. While the U.S has given non-repayable grants.
If he moves to Texas, good riddance!
I would not be surprised if Twitter ends up being operated out of a lot in an abandoned strip-mall somewhere in rural Texas at some point in the next year or two.
Of course he wouldn't need beds if his solution wasn't fewer people doing more work (over work), and not necessarily competently. He'd also have advertisers if he didn't have some warped idea of free speech that bans his critics but maintains Nazis etc are just fine.
It's funny, for all the complaints about Twitter censorship and election interference there was plenty of coverage of Twitter etc banning it and details around the NY Post story. They effectively Streisanded the story into prominence despite banning people from linking to it.
I still new about it and I don't read right wing news sites or use Twitter or Facebook.
They should demand Musk show some competence as a CEO and manager first. Take the severance, it's probably better than anything Musk has in store.
Apparently he's on the edge of losing his GDPR compliance. Twitters chief privacy officer resigned and only has the bare minimum of members on the review board in Ireland to keep Twitter's GDPR one stop in Ireland and not be subject to 27 regulators.