...doesn't mean we repel everything.

Inflatable dolls with gaping mouths come to mind.

(So does liver and a pair of hand vibrators.)

P.S. Warmup the liver first; straight from the fridge is a real downer!

This appears to just be establishing more or less bog standard anti-monopoly rules, but on the internet.

I wonder why the existing regulations couldn't be used.

Can I use my Aspidistra instead?

All we need is another bad version of unix!

"TECO rules"

That's where EMACS began.

Why two rather than, say 5, or any countable number, or a continuum, or even the universe as a whole?

The latter would be entertaining as it may give us observations about the unobservable universe!

Why are they storing user data in the first place?

(And no: I'm not referring to their app store (hashed) password.)

Not necessarily so. The SCOTUS ruling was based on federal law; this ruling is based on state law. Can a state impose additional constraints on employers' or employees' rights and obligations? (For example, could they impose a higher minimum wage than the feds require?)

However, if upheld, it would only apply to Californian workers.

Now, if they'd just apply it to their own data collecting.

So: three wrongs make a right?

Besides, I run plenty of programmes on my Windows machine without ever having used the MS store.

How does preventing Epic from selling its games prevent others using Unreal Engine?

He's dead, Dave!

Yeah; they should go into entertainment so Harvey can have a shot at them.

Actually, we bought our current house and acreage without visiting it (although we did get a zillion photographs from the realtor, so we knew what we were getting into).

Just say NO to revealing any technical information of the product until the sale (of the business) is complete.