This is a false equivalence. At some level, I agreed to the ToS for my phone, so the tracking on my phone is at least somewhat consensual (not enough, IMO, but there was SOMETHING).

I can use GrapheneOS or /e/OS or some other system that greatly-reduces the tracking, or I can leave my phone at home if I'm going to do something for which I don't want a third party to have a record. I can, to a certain extent, assess the amount of data that is acquired, either by using software to assess what my phone records, or looking through my account data (certainly Google and Apple don't show everything, but they show at least some things).

I didn't accept a EULA for Flock. I cannot query the data Flock has on me, or who made a query for that data, or the metadata that they have aggregated and for which they provide access.

If you can't see the difference between the two scenarios, I don't know what to tell you.

Yes, right now we're running into the problem where municipalities are turning "we don't have Flock" into a selling point because Flock became the Kleenex of ALPRs...but Axon is also getting at least some recognition in the space as well. It's not the cure, certainly, but I do think that the bipartisan, organized backlash against ALPRs is causing at least some tension as to whether the backlash will persist if the line item is still on the government ledgers.

Agreed; it is pretty nice to see those wearing MAGA hats and those wearing Planned Parenthood T-shirts sitting next to each other at city council meetings on the matter.

Given the fact that the most famous and most popular Blizzard games WERE CODED PRIMARILY BY BOOMERS (and some GenX; admittedly Mike Morhaime was early GenX)...the answer is "a good number of gamers, probably".

The oldest millennials were in college when World of Warcraft came out; it was boomers and GenX who made Diablo, Diablo II, Warcraft, and Starcraft.

I'm not saying that Blizzard isn't still making popular games, but I *am* saying that the last decade has consisted of remasters and sequels from the studio, with the sole exception of Overwatch.

I don't exactly have a Blizzard org chart in front of me, so I can't create the pie chart of boomers/genx/millenial/genz employees at the studio, but I do think it's overly reductive to assume that a studio who's most iconic titles were made by boomers and early genx would somehow suffer if their staffing roster retained them.

It depends on focal length as well as f-stop (shorter focal length gives more depth of field at the same f-stop). Smaller sensors need shorter focal lengths for the same field of view, so a "50mm equivalent field of view" f/2.8 lens for a smaller sensor will have more depth of field than a "50mm equivalent field of view" f/2.8 lens for a larger sensor.

Nintendo didn't buy Rare. Microsoft bought Rare in 2002 to turn them into an Xbox exclusive developer, like they did with Bungie.

The Car and Driver numbers are for he US only. The GP's list is based global sales. Still, the Model Y is only the best-selling EV in the US, and not the best-selling car in the world by any measure.

"For years people have been seeing us as a speaker company,"

Yes Brandon, this is the thing that people generally like. When the speakers work, they sound very good.

"What we actually are is an audio operating system." ...And this is the part that has been somewhere between tolerable and the biggest liability. Yes, when it works, it's great, but it's been so focused on being "automagic" that when there's a problem, it's like a Bugatti hitting a speed bump.

If Sonos wanted to claw back some good will, all they had to do was to implement a "generic Bluetooth mode" and an aux jack. This way, it ensures people can still use the speaker (the most liked and most reliable part) irrespective of whether the software is good or bad. ...But, since they'd rather cram AI into it, they'll likely continue to bleed users and installers, who will implement Bluesound or WiiM instead and become the Oracle of multi-room audio - obscenely priced, running on an increasingly niche user base, and circling the drain for a while longer than most, but ultimately fail as more and more people consider the Sonos "operating system" radioactive.

Various SPARC-based Sun Enterprise Server products supported hot-swapping CPUs under Solaris. I think some of the POWER-based IBM System p servers support hot-swapping CPUs under Linux. Maybe some of the Unisys ES7000 support it?

Or a musician.

The implication is that the "pusher" sells heavily-discounted drugs to the kids, or gives them free samples, to get them addicted. Then they need to steal money to buy more drugs to feed their habit. I'm not sure this was ever a real thing, but that's the narrative the ads were playing on.

Why? What evidence is there to support that? Or lacking evidence, even a proposed biological mechanism by which harm could be caused by non-ionising radiation?

I'm not a biologist or oncologist, but here in Australia, it's well-known that prolonged exposure to non-ionising UV radiation as a significant contributing factor to developing melanoma and other skin cancers. I'm not saying mobile phones necessarily cause cancer, just pointing out that there are mechanisms by which non-ionising radiation is known to cause cancer. Simply being non-ionising dosn't mean prolonged exposure is safe.

JPEG2000 was brought down by patent licensing. No-one wanted to pay the fees required to implement it. It was never about technical considerations.

She quit after Lavabit e-mail was shut down in 2013, on the grounds that without a private, anonymous e-mail service, it wouldn't be possible to keep doing Groklaw. Can you link to the "live" interview she did, or where a journalist claimed to have confirmed her identity, or a cite a source where she said that was part of the reason for quitting? Because I remember following the whole thing, and the identity of the PJ persona was cloudy to the end.

The interviews linked are all "responds to prepared questions via e-mail" type affairs. That could easily have been fielded by a team behind the name. I mean, it's possible PJ was just a very privacy-conscious person. But there's still nothing linking the PJ name or alias to an individual.

Does anyone actually have any evidence PJ was a real person and not just a persona created by IBM's PR department? PJ appeared mysteriously, exclusively posting stuff supportive of IBM's position in this case. They never turned their attention to any other litigation. It's awfully suspicious. You'd think a real person who knew that much about the relevant law would have opinions on other cases as well, and you'd expect them to market themselves using the fame/goodwill generated with Groklaw. You'd also think they'd have done at least one interview, or you could find at least one person who's met them. I'm not saying anything posted on Groklaw wasn't true, just that it always seemed like a very successful IBM PR exercise to me.

No, but CSAM can be on a phone. So can a list of assassination targets, an app that detonates an explosive, stolen classified data, Stuxnet-like malware...there are PLENTY of actually-problematic things that could be on a phone. ...for the record, that doesn't mean that this person had any of those things on his phone (and I'm inclined to believe that he didn't), just that digital contraband exists and it CAN exist on a phone.