They're propaganda companies.

Republicans equate being pro-market with being pro-big-business-agenda. The assumption is that anything that is good for big business is good for the market and therefore good for consumers.

So in the Republican framing, anti-trust, since is interferes with what big business wants to do, is *necessarily* anti-market and bad for consumers, which if you accept their axioms would have to be true, even though what big business wants to do is use its economic scale and political clout to consolidate, evade competition, and lock in consumers.

That isn't economics. It's religion. And when religious dogmas are challenge, you call the people challenging them the devil -- or in current political lingo, "terrorists". A "terrorist" in that sense doesn't have to commit any actual act of terrorism. He just has to be a heathen.

... give a little ground on the opensource drivers.

In my experience, some Linux systems still need binary drivers for stuff like WiFi or cellular. Just hold your nose while you download the Windows driver and load it with NDISWrapper.

And you thought it was bad when your cloud-dependant IoT device or game bit the dust when the server went away? Imagine a data center or AI based business going dark when Nvidia decides it's time for them to upgrade.

My laptop looks like crap compared to a TV monitor. Even an older generation TV set.

Really? The Chinese have it*. And I bought a Chinese converter to rescue a few older but still good plasma and even CRT TV sets.

*Probably due to the fact that this is where our Windows machines come from.

Not "used to", "have to". The inhabitants bought into the "no car, depend on mass transit" lifestyle. Now they can't shop at the big box grocery stores, let alone drive to the one a mile farther away to take advantage of a good sale. So far, working exactly to local merchant's plans. Soon, the big box stores will close (they need to draw customers from a larger area to survive) and everyone will depend on the corner bodegas for beer and ultra-processed junk food.

Welcome to the food desert. I hope Mamdami's plan for government-run stores pans out.

The top priority of the administration was of course feeding USAID "into a wood chipper".

https://www.newyorker.com/cult...

Once they "finished the job" it was time to paean the worlds dictators while systematically and illegally dismantling every lever of US influence they could get their hands on.

https://www.bbc.com/news/artic...

Then they came for "hope" itself.

https://www.belgrade-news.com/...

Finally they came for the fonts and there were no typesetters left to speak for the fonts.

To watch your dogs a wifi device is OK but if real security is a concern understand that home invasion gangs use ~10W wifi jammers as standard practice now.

Amcrest supports RTSP pull and SFTP push which is handy.

In other words you can't explain it and you just fall back on arrogance and vulgarity rather than try to form a coherent argument. Got it.

The article does not clearly state that. This is the part I asked you for. Normally, what you do is reference specific parts of the article, usually in the form of quotes, to actually make your argument. If it's so certain. Then do that. However, it doesn't matter because, as I pointed out, that was just one example. I don't have much stake in one example. I only need one example for my point, so if it's contentious, I don't have to bother defending it, I can just provide another one.

So you just completely ignore the other example I provided? And I'm supposed to be the one under a rock?

If lawmakers were serious and believed in the provisions they must have had a good idea in advance what reaction to expect from industry so why have they folded so easily?

I sometimes get the distinct impression lawmakers don't even care and just dangle the threat of promulgating good reasonable provisions just to rake in corrupt political contributions.

Social media has become a toxic dump. If you wouldn't allow children to play in waste effluent from a 1960s nuclear power plant, then you shouldn't allow them to play in the social media that's out there. Because, frankly, of the two, plutonium is safer.

I do, however, contend that this is a perfectly fixable problem. There is no reason why social media couldn't be safe. USENET was never this bad. Hell, Slashdot at its worst was never as bad as Facebook at its best. And Kuro5hin was miles better than X. Had a better name, too. The reason it's bad is that politicians get a lot of kickbacks from the companies and the advertisers, plus a lot of free exposure to millions. Politicians would do ANYTHING for publicity.

I would therefore contend that Australia is fixing the wrong problem. Brain-damaging material on Facebook doesn't magically become less brain-damaging because kids have to work harder to get brain damage. Nor are adults mystically immune. If you took the planet's IQ today and compared it to what it was in the early 1990s, I'm convinced the global average would have dropped 30 points. Australia is, however, at least acknowledging that a problem exists. They just haven't identified the right one. I'll give them participation points. The rest of the globe, not so much.

Doesn't matter. That sort of thing is lost on the majority of the public. The climate change folks need to put a better spin on their marketing pitch.

... with this news until the Northeastern US wasn't under a polar vortex forecast.

Screw the C3S forecasts and CO2 cutting efforts. Throw another lump of coal in the stove, Bob Cratchet.

Garbage gyre.

Excel is dumpster with a hole rusted through the bottom leaving a trail of garbage everywhere it goes.

"A programmatic scan of leading genomics journals reveals that approximately one-fifth of papers with supplementary Excel gene lists contain erroneous gene name conversions."

https://link.springer.com/arti...