The EU actually agreed to bring the UK into Horizon as part of the Brexit agreement.

From the EU Website:

How will the UK be associated to Horizon Europe?
Through the Trade and Cooperation Agreement between the EU and the UK (TCA). All
aspects of the UK association to Horizon Europe were agreed on 24 December 2020 in the
TCA and documents attached to the Agreement. The association will enter into force through
the formal adoption of a Protocol that is already agreed in principle. No additional
negotiations are foreseen.

https://ec.europa.eu/info/site...

Clearly the EU has decided that 'Agreement in principle' can sometimes mean 'we changed our mind'.
That's their choice of course - but they're cutting off their nose to spite their face.

They put out a tender for a research company. The criteria for which research company gets the bucket of Apple cash is...

> Who can come up with the biggest number and still (kinda) maintain a straight face

> So now does hiring undocumented migrant workers put you on the hook also?

In the UK?
Definitely. You have to check worker documentation when you hire someone in the UK.

> What about the proverbial shoe shine boy?

Shoe-shine boy (if working independently) is self employed, and wouldn't be caught by this ruling. Nobody tells him how much to charge for example.

> I know a lot of berry and apple farms that literally pay you by the bushel or carton for picking the crops. Are they obligated to provide me benefits now or police how much picking I do for them?

In the uk, it might depend on circumstances, but probably yes. Minimum wage, sick pay like the uber drivers.

> These are all the questions I suspect were not addressed when someone conceives legislation.

court cases like this clarify the details, but broadly the uk has the concept of workers who are somewhere between employed and self-employed and get benefits that lie somewhere between the two. This case confirmed that Uber drivers are workers.

Nope - it slightly changes the equations on how gravity works.

from wikipedia:

Milgrom noted that this discrepancy could be resolved if the gravitational force experienced by a star in the outer regions of a galaxy was proportional to the square of its centripetal acceleration (as opposed to the centripetal acceleration itself, as in Newton's second law), or alternatively if gravitational force came to vary inversely with radius (as opposed to the inverse square of the radius, as in Newton's law of gravity)

There will be the occasional kerfuffle, some arguments about whether the labels are accurate, and users will still download the apps the want with approximately zero concern for the labels.

Starlink may play it like that, but they could equally just take the money and not meaningfully change their pricing model.

Let's imagine that they make an option to rent the modem for $20/month. They're now $120/month with nothing down.

They have to offer services that are 'reasonably comparable' with similar services in urban areas.
There are plenty of urban broadband offerings at $100/month for 100/15, so they're already there before subsidy. (I'm assuming $120 is reasonably comparable with $100)

Perhaps they'll choose to use the subsidy money to reduce their prices. Perhaps they'll just throw it in the general fund.

Which is why Starlink is a great solution for rural areas.

And cables are still probably the answer in cities.

The technologies complement each other nicely.

Now all you need to do is un-f*** the anti-competitive behaviour of ISPs in cities and you're golden. Possibly bring in some kind of universal-service obligation for urban areas where a given ISP wants to 'play'

With guns drawn. Don't forget the guns part.

Seriously - even if she did this, and even if you need to confiscate all her gear - just send a cop with a badge and a warrant to knock on the door.

the local content laws are at a national level. e.g. France has specific local content laws.
The 'no geoblocking' law would be at an EU level.

The EU would have to come up a rule regarding local content that was consistent with the no geoblocking. Possibly xx % EU content, possibly 'show what you like'.
Of course, they'd have to go to battle with France and perhaps others if they were to over-ride the existing national laws.

you might think that if you didn't know already that wingsuiters can do it (see my earlier comment)

https://www.skydivemag.com/new...

I have watched the movie, and I don't see that. He jumps out of a helicopter. Dives down to the lower of the three mountaintops, then 'swoops' up over the higher one.
(converting kinetic energy to potential)

The video shows some wingsuiters diving down and then one of them 'swoops' upwards as the others continue.

Thing is - wingsuiters can do this already without power.
https://www.skydivemag.com/new...

There are various wingsuiters who have achieved sustained level flight using jets.
e.g. https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

If the BMW engine was able to achieve sustained level flight, then my money says they would have actually shown that in the video.

As to the 186mph - nothing impressive here. The wingsuit speed record (without power) is 246.60 mph
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/....

I'm seeing something where they have strapped on an engine which does not very much and then asked their (well paid) pilot to try to make it look good with smoke and mirrors...

Not sure what would make me a 'shill' - but I'm a huge fan of Google. I use them many times a day for search/maps/gmail and loads more. (and I do that on Chrome)

I'm more ambivalent about Facebook, but use whatsapp every day and messenger frequently.

All of this is free. I think that's awesome.

There are two business models in play here.

Apple: Charge upfront - Charge loads for devices (and get something from the store, services, etc)

Facebook/Google/Many others. - Free upfront, Make it pay through advertising.

Apple's just throwing a giant fuck you in the 'make it pay through advertising' business model.

It isn't hypocritical except in so far as they pretend that they're acting in their consumers' interests.
The thing is the consumers have been getting a load of really cool products from the free stuff. (gmail / google / google maps / facebook / whatsapp / instagram / etc)

It's going to be a lot harder for all those folks to make things work now - and that tilts the scales in favour of the 'pay up front' business model that Apple uses.

People talk a lot about how evil those data-harvesting-advertising companies are, but I bet they also use those services and would be sad if they were gone.

Thing is - this isn't a case where the 'free up front' people can just switch to charging up front like Apple. A lot of businesses (particularly ones that rely on network effect) would simply never happen in a world without advertising money.

If Apple were being honest about this, they'd give users an option to turn off the tracking/advertising/etc - but they'd also make it easy for the service providers to make it clear that no advertising == no service.

Sure - you can turn off tracking for google maps and google - but now you can't use them.

Of course - Apple won't even allow an app on their store if it requires you to enable tracking to get the functionality.

In that regard - they're massive hypocrites.

How about - If you don't want to donate to the hosts, then don't donate to the hosts.

Does this really need to generate outrage? AirBNB asked - you can say no. (or yes if you want to)