It's implying no such thing. The actions of a company can not be linked to coercive power without understand the needs or wants of the customer first. There is some benefit to both parties that Google's results are promoted to the top and many customers like getting consistent and understandable results. I.e. if I type "maps" into Google I would see it as a sign of a failing search algorithm to not promote Google Maps to the very top of the list. It is incredibly interesting that Bing will also list Google as the top result for maps, and only lists itself as number 4.

A monopoly in one field does not make an action in another against anti-trust laws. For instance Microsoft got done for bundling IE with Windows where it had a clear monopoly on the market. If instead they bundled IE with flight simulator it doesn't matter.

Likewise Google is manipulating search results to boost it's own services to end users. The end users are however free to do as they please. That doesn't make them necessarily against the anti-trust law for the monopoly they have on internet advertising.

And regardless of what experts think, what really matters in this case is exclusively what the judge thinks and that hasn't been tested as far as I know.

Why? People should be free to drive whatever they want and can afford. In many cases new cars have far better safety features than older shitboxes. I learnt to drive on a shitbox and owned a shitbox, but the one time I nearly had an accident I was driving my parent's convertible and lives were potentially saved by ABS, a feature which my car didn't have.

What people should NOT drive is a car beyond their means. I like the direction some states headded with the introduction of a 130kW/t power-to-weight restriction for provisional driver holders. Watching idiot teenagers behind the wheel of muscle cars, or hotted up cars without any increase in safety features (i.e. boosting the power output without boosting the suspension, breaks, or wheel size) just boggles the mind.

That depends if your watch just ticks the time or has one of several complications which are incredibly intricate and difficult to design and assemble. You won't find a good mechanical watch with chronograph, self winding mechanism, perpetual calendar, etc for a few hundred, even if you put it in a cardboard case.

Quality and time keeping ability are not the same thing. Any and every $10 Timex will be more accurate than an officially certified swiss chronometer. Rolex, Omega, etc bring to you quality construction and style (they are jewelry items). Like my grandpa's Omega that I have still ticking away at home after 75 years, or my dad's Rolex that has been on his wrist every day for the last 40 years.

Ahhh now you're adding the missing bit of context :-)

Stupid people will be caught anyway, they don't need massive useless border checks for this.

This raises an interesting question: What the hell is the fucking point of searching electronic devices. By their very nature they can send data across the border without a physical interaction with customs. What are they hoping to gain from this? Any illegal activity can already be done from either side of the border including all the usual nasties like terrorism, child pornography, and industrial espionage.

What are they hoping to gain other than catching a few dumb people which likely would have been caught anyway?

I would actually disagree with this history slightly. Hardware audio was dead long before Vista came out. Creative bet big on accelerating something that didn't actually need accelerating. Audio processing used a tiny TINY portion of the CPU time and was simply not worth buying hardware for. The inclusion of on-board 7.1 sound which wasn't appreciably worse than what Creative offered for anyone other than someone who actually did audio recording is what killed Creative. Even then most professionals were going the route of M-Audio or other "audio" affiliated companies while Creative seemed to be chasing gamers with a useless product.

In any case the problems with hardware audio existed long before that point too. Creative were pushing procedural effects based on game location to be applied to sound rather than any actual processing. "Environmental" effects like EAX were significantly worse even at the later stages than what A3D were doing with actual simulation of the sound. They were firmly in the litigate, not innovate camp.

Now that being said I'm not sure A3D would have survived this day and age either because I in general think that people don't care enough about the potential sound improvement to spend $100 on dedicated hardware for it. Now if they still existed and licensed it off as software extensions....

Side note: Just checked out Creative's website. When their flagship card doesn't mention the word "games" on the website you know you're chasing a different industry. But oooh it has swappable opamps, like that matters for some reason... yes it's a company truly lost.

No YOUR insurance doesn't. Mine definitely does Again the problem is with the insurance system, not with the lack of a taxi license, and the insurance is tied to vehicle registration, not to the driver. So if I don't own a car, get in my friends car and run over grandma and she needs a new hip-replacement, still covered. Note that this base level of liability does not include property, just personal and medical. If grandma was driving a Ferrari then I'm royally screwed.

Given how in Saint's Row 4 there is a gun which is a giant dildo which you can use to violate police anally and then shoot them into the sky I don't think they are being too negatively affected.

Actually their position has nothing to do with purpose, and everything to do with commercial operations. See the drones are unregulated as always for hobby and recreational use. And checking one's own gutters most definitely falls under recreational use. As does checking my neighbour's gutters. Just make sure you don't receive compensation for doing it and you're perfectly fine.

Yeah things change. You start applying more sense to how you work. You start working with harnesses etc.
Much like the drone industry. Yeah I don't take my drone out as much as the person running a professional aerial videography service. By he's also incredibly unlikely to be doing it with a home made drone, full of DIY wiring, a healthy dose of experimental firmware, and a history of stupid arse mistakes like not using locknuts to hold down a prop.

Saying someone does something commercially means they do it more often means that they are automatically in a higher danger category is very ignorant.

The consequence of false fire alarms are a fine for an incorrect call-out.
The consequence of a false suicide alarm is spending 3days in a mental asylum and getting a blood test for TB, HIV, and other diseases?

I don't think anyone here is saying there shouldn't be consequences for what he did. But WTF were they doing to him other than giving him a free health check and pushing a potentially unstable person over the edge by detaining them in quite bizarre circumstances?

Implying without context that it was a bad decision...