See this other post from just a little earlier.

Whoever wrote the summary (or possibly the original story) doesn't understand that GmbH is the German acronym for "limited liability company" (like Ltd. in the US/UK), leading to the hilarious sentence beginning

I guess I'm not geeky enough to know why I should care about this site.

I understand what an open-source computer program is. You can have an open-source compiler or interpreter, for example. But what would an open source language be?

The specification of a programming language was always thought to be in the public domain: a kind of fact. So gcc is open-source but the C programming language itself isn't. Nice for MS to release the specification for their language, but they shouldn't attach the moniker "open-source".

I don't think circling the moon is enough to get the rendezvous to happen a month before liftoff from the lunar surface. Dec 5 maybe?

Adaptations like this (in ants!) are a central point in Adrian Tschaikovskyâ(TM)s novel Children of Time.

One linked commentary claims the privacy concerns are overblown because the system phones home with a plaintext certificated unique to the developer rather than unique to the application. Now if you primarily run a few applications all created by the same developer, then this is not a big deal. But the typical user runs many applications from a large variety of developers. Yes, Eve the eavesdropeer won't be able to tell if I'm running Firefox or Thunderbird, but she will sure be able to distinguish either from Notability and Minecraft.

I use the following, but many variants work.

tr -dc A-Za-z0-9_ < /dev/urandom | head -c 16 | xargs

untrustworthy

The point of this "T2" chip, like Intel's TPM, is that the computer manufacturer wants the computer to distrust its owner on behalf of "content creators". And this has the obvious failure mode: if the system has a layer that is more powerful than the putative owner, then that layer owns the system to the detriment of the owner.

Can someone explain how Wozniak is getting around section 230 of the CDA? How can he hold YouTube responsible for videos uploaded by others?

So... they're not monolithic, but they are monolithic? Can't have that both ways.

By the by, yeah, conservatives are a wide and varied group, just like progressives are.

Last I checked, the conservative crowd was kicked off Reddit (they even went out and built their own, with blackjack and hookers), so I doubt it's them.

Also, without examples of this alleged racism, it's hard to say if it's actual Kluxer-speak, or if it's just stuff that gets said which hurt some poor flower's feelings. If the former, there's also no indication if it's just the usual bullshit trolling that every website forum on the planet has to put up with (we see it here with the GNAA bullshit), or...?

Pretty certain that the blind are going to have a very hard time playing the First-Person shooter games (or anything requiring visual acumen, really)... only so far you can go to accommodate, campers... sorry about that. I think it would be cool if someone innovated a means to let the blind actually get in on the action in such games, though.

Also, I don't get the 'limited time' angle. Isn't that what save-points are for? As long as you're not requiring a player to grind through, say, two hours of gameplay at average speed before hitting a save-point, what's the issue? These things were not crafted as some smartphone time-waster.

I was thinking something similar... I get that someone driving a $70k 4x4 truck with a steel grille guard would be more tempted to go full asshole when it comes to pedestrians, I drive a far less expensive truck and the temptation is strong under the right circumstances (especially when it comes to those chumps that step out from hiding behind a parked car at the last second w/o looking). However, I sincerely doubt that someone in a $70k Porsche (let alone driving something way out-there like a $3m Konigsegg) is going to risk damaging their car by colliding with someone in it.

The sad part is, it's hard to tell** if the government prodded it, or if Hotstar pre-emptively dumped the episode. It's one thing if you see a company forced to take something down due to an external force. It's another if it did so on its own, because you never know if it was done out of fear, or out of a sycophantic desire to get favors.

** to tell for certain anyway. After all, lies abound, as does the fact that in big bureaucracies one minion (even the lead one) may not know what others in the same org has done or said...