I want the New York Times to win and set a precedent that feeding copyrighted works into an AI without permission is a copyright violation (regardless of what the AI does with it or what output it generates). Pop the generative AI (aka "slurp up a whole bunch of copyrighted content, mix it around and spit bits of it back out") bubble completely.

The Chinese-made cars being sold in Australia by brands like BTD and MG and GWMHaval are not "unreliable junk".

It's a recall when a software update is important enough to ground planes until it's been done...

Here in Australia if your phone is stolen you can have the IMEI blacklisted and it will no longer be able to connect to any network. And both iOS and Android already have tracking features that let you find the device remotely and even lock or wipe it. Not to mention the cloud lock many phones have to prevent factory resets.

If riding in one of these driverless cars would cost less than riding in a conventional taxi or Uber, I would definitely use them for the rare occasions when public transport won't work.

I seriously doubt any streaming provider is actually going to invest in the kind of quality Australian content that really should be made and instead will invest in more of the same cheap junk that infests our free-to-air networks.

Jellyfin is open source so that can't happen.

Someone should take all the bits of the Arduino ecosystem that are open source software or open source hardware and fork/mirror it all so that you can download and use everything without needing to visit any Qualcomm or Arduino owned websites or agree to any terms of service.

Why does Amazon care what software someone chooses to run on a device they own? Is there a law (or a court ruling) somewhere that requires Amazon to act against these apps? Have rights holders told Amazon that they wont be able to continue distributing content belonging to those rights holders unless they do this?

Although since this talks about "sports streaming", my guess is that the pressure is comming from entities involved with European soccer competitions, the companies with the legitimate rights to stream and/or broadcast those games and the governments that have been bought off by said leagues and streamers/broadcasters...

Shut up and take my gold pressed latinum (or rather I would say that if I didn't need to give it all to my landlord...)

The requirement is that the money has to be spent on content production, not just buying existing content.

Australia USED to make some REALLY good scripted dramas and other shows. These days the good shows are few and far between with our screens being infested with increasing amounts of reality garbage.

Will these driverless cabs go to the Las Vegas airport (and in a way that's actually useful for people flying in and out and at a reasonable price) or will the Vegas taxi Mafia stop that from happening?

Other than my phone, my windows PC, my router and my FTTC box, I don't own anything that connects to the Internet at all. I will keep using my 32" Samsung dumb tv until it dies or Australia gets new OTA tv standards that require a new device.

Thee are organisations that are both lobbying governments to stop using these cameras and challenging their constitutionality in court. (I believe the Institute for Justice is one such organisation). Spreading the word about their campaigns is one way to help.