Windows actually is a registered trademark for Microsoft. However, it's a registered trademark specifically in relation to computing and technology. Bear in mind that a trademark isn't granted on *any* use of the term, but with respect to specific industries (which was the bone of contention with the term "Apple" when Apple moved into the music distribution business and tried to throw its weight around in that industry). If Microsoft wanted to start up in the business of glazing - even say smart glazing - they'd have trouble asserting their Windows trademark in that area.

The problem with "Spectacles" isn't just that it's a word in common(ish) usage in English, it's that it's a common word relating to watch Snap are selling: eyewear.

Apple didn't create the database of hashes of child sex abuse images. The National Center for Missing and Exploited Children did. Apple just compares hashes of images uploaded to their servers to hashes from known images of child sex abuse. So no - Apple is not and was never in illegal possession of illegal images, at least not for the purposes of creating this database.

That's not how the software works. It doesn't identify genitals that appear to be those of underage kids. The software uses indexing (or "fingerprinting") technology that identifies known images of child sexual abuse. If you're going to throw out hypotheticals, it's probably a good idea to read up on what it is that you're talking about and how it works.

Remember when Microsoft bid $44 billion to buy Yahoo in 2008? Yahoo absolutely should have taken that deal. I suspect that this isn't much different. I'm not an industry expert, but I have serious doubts about whether Discord will ever be worth that much. After all, the service that they provide has been pretty well commoditized - is there really anything special about it other than their user base? It seems like Discord is easily replaceable as a service, and it likely will.

I'm a huge fan of Firefox but an LWN comment just pointed out that they've been paying Mitchell Baker 2.5 million USD per year.

https://assets.mozilla.net/ann...

I was going to sign up for their VPN service as a way to support them (and I probably stil will) but damn this makes me feel like a punk.

I think you're putting "Passing on the right" - and the legality thereof - above the statement from the human testers "That was safe to do".

Legal and safe are by no means the same things.

To take it a step further, I feel that suggesting driving is a privilege is not only inaccurate, but tends to be pretty intellectually lazy. The fact is that most of our freedoms are a privilege - at least by that standard. For example, even though many believe that we have a right to life, liberty, and prosperity; using the "privilege" standard, our right to not be incarcerated is a privilege. Breaking the law will land one in prison (assuming due process of law). Further, assuming that driving a car is a privilege suggests that a drivers license can be revoked for arbitrary reasons and without any sort of due process. The fact of the matter is that it cannot. Just like being a licensed electrician isn't a privilege, rather, it's an activity that generally requires government licensure. Said licensure is not a privilege given to a select few, but a license to perform a profession issued by a sanctioning body to anyone who meets certain qualifications and cannot be revoked without cause or due process. I would argue that anything that is merely considered a privilege doesn't hold up to that standard. It's time to drop this lazy idea that so many have just accepted as fact.

Getting back to the root of the issue, whether or not driving is a right or privilege should not dictate that a person's movements are subject to government monitoring...that's what this is really all about, and this is what is at the heart of the court's ruling.

I'm curious - why are you so quick to call anyone who questions your comment or respectfully disagrees with you stupid (or other ad hominem insults that aren't germane to the discussion )?

Makes sense, and you are certainly not the first person to make the comparison. Sure, if people stop believing in the currency and try to sell all at once, its value will collapse. That goes for any currency. In this case, the main difference between a cryptocurrency and a fiat currency is that the latter has the backing of a government. However, a fiat currency can still drop to near zero value as well. I read a good quote about this a few years ago - "a real Ponzi scheme takes fraud; bitcoin, by contrast, seems more like a collective delusion."

It sounds like you do not understand what a Ponzi scheme is. Read up, my friend. It may be a bubble, but it's not a Ponzi scheme by any definition that I've ever heard of.

Yeah, but imagine a Beowulf cluster of three-digit users!

Hah!

It's been some time since I've used IRC. Has the protocol been updated to include group VoIP? Discord is quite good in this regard (although I find TeamSpeak's client better for gaming for several reasons).

Take one down and another will certainly pop up in its place. Maybe one of these days, admins will use local crypto to make honeypotting difficult (or impossible) for law enforcement.