No.
More like basically decent people don't think it's alright to follow the bad example of a few people around them, so the number of people being obnoxious drops to where those who do really stand out. Social pressure can be an effective way to minimize disruptive behavior.

This sounds like an education campaign, not new rules. Unless I read it wrong (or the summary left it out), this is about trying to set the social norms, not about issuing fines.

I keep seeing these posts about what's needed to get people into an EV, and the bar keeps getting raised.

Frankly, we don't need high speed chargers to be as common a gas pumps, as the majority of gas pumps are for local use, and most charging is slow-speed at home. (We do need good solutions for those who rent or have on-street parking, though.) And for trips in the USA, if you're on the Interstate, you shouldn't need to think about it if you can use the Tesla Superchargers. Non-Interstate trips are getting more coverage, so most of those trips work now, too.

Posts about why you can't switch to an EV now sound more like excuses that real reasons, which is why goal posts keep moving. There are many good reasons why people who switch to EVs rarely switch back.

MicroSD has been around for 20 years now, and it's been another 6 years of SD before that. They can now fit tons of storage in the format, but they can't bump it up to modern performance speeds. It's time to find a new format that overcomes that. Now I'm not saying that this is necessarily the right answer, but it's certainly something in the right direction.

YES!

I was going to suggest the same thing. The ship could go into orbit around the best candidate planet in the target solar system, then seed it with life to try to get it to optimal conditions before raising humans to live there from frozen embryos. They could send sufficient DNA to eliminate any inbreeding concerns, and not for humans, but all the species introduced. And in many cases, it may be simplest to have a database and synthesize new DNA as needed for each new seed or embryo.

I imagine sending out a fleet of them to dozens or hundreds of star systems in the hopes of finding some good planets to colonize.

But at the same time, it's always interesting to consider what it would take to build a generation ship.

So will global warming eventually kill the .tv top-level domain? That's something like 10% of the country's GDP.

So it's effectively an organ transplant, only instead of using a donor organ, they use donor stem cells to grow the needed functionality in the recipient. That's a really cool technique, but it has all the rejection issues. Now if they could disable whatever caused the recipient's immune system to mess up their receptors in the first place, they could then use the recipient's own stem cells and eliminate all the immune suppression required for organ recipients, and it would be a real cure. This is one step in that process.

https://redmonk.com/sogrady/fi...

That's the full graph, showing how each language they tracked rated on both GitHub and Stack Overflow.

I find it interesting that D is slightly ahead of Visual Basic on GitHub and significantly ahead on Stack Overflow. And everyone has heard of Visual Basic, but it's hard to find people who have even heard of D.

It would be interesting to do a study of how well programmers comment their code and see how that is correlated with touch typing, or with typing speed in general. My assumption is that it's strongly correlated.

Though I have to say AI is changing things. Now you can write a good comment, and then hit tab to accept the suggested code, sometimes needing to make a few edits. It's crazy.

And it gets more confusing as some people put 65C02 processors in or a 65816 (which includes 65C02 instructions). Even in the Atari community, people will get it backwards.

The summary mentions added instructions, so I assume those are 65C02 instructions, most notably the STZ instruction (store zero), allowing you to write zero to memory without altering one of the real registers. The downside is that there were undocumented instructions that people had figured out on the original 6502, and some people used them. Apparently it was done in some cases to obfuscate code to make removing copy protection more difficult. A few of the instructions were actually useful in some cases. So adding in new instructions from the 65C02 or 65816 reduces compatibility. The only exception would be the original opcodes that locked up the CPU.

As a side note, the undocumented instructions were caused by not having entries in the instruction decoding table for them, so they got a mix of entries for other instructions, enabling various parts of the CPU in ways that behaved strangely.

Much of the development of new code on retro computers is done using tools on modern computers. Last year I did some coding for my Atari using Linux.

I wrote a simple AUTORUN.SYS program to launch a BASIC program, but with a few tweaks like enabling BASIC if it was disabled and displaying an error if it's a model without BASIC. And I managed to get it in 124 bytes so that it would fit on a single 128-byte sector, so it can be a drop-in replacement for any other version without those features. That was fun, and I wrote and assembled it under Linux.

I also wrote a FUSE file system to mount Atari disk images as native file systems under Linux (and apparently MacOS and with some hacking Windows). That was fun, and more about analyzing the various Atari DOS formats. No Atari hardware was used in that project.

I was going to push back and say that those are things that Apple's own products also don't make use of (other than the iPhone itself), so excluding those from third party use isn't giving Apple an advantage in selling additional products, which is what I think the whole complaint is about. If Apple is using restricted APIs to sell additional stuff that works with iPhone, but competitors can't, I can see why that would be an issue the courts would be concerned about.

So the "I was going to" was before I realized that Apple does have just such a product: The Apple Watch. I haven't used one, but I expect it wants to work as an extension of the phone, so it would need to do many things that normally are only allowed to be done by the phone itself, including access to all notifications and sharing WiFi login data so it can also connect.

So, yeah, that's an issue.

The key word in the summary is "bankruptcy." Assuming the ISP is in bankruptcy, this settlement is an easy thing for them. They record companies are just another creditor, so all that really matters is that the bankruptcy court agrees that the settlement is fair. The real losers are the other creditors.

If it's such a security risk to open those internal APIs, just eliminate them entirely. Make all the Apple applications work without them as well, and then everybody is on a level playing field without terrible security risks.

If Apple really needs extra access to make add-on products work nicely, then the EU really does have a point. (And I assume that's the case.)

While generally this is a great idea, on unintended consequence is that laptop makers will limit the number of USB-C ports if adding support for all the features is a challenge.