Freenet is also based on middle-out compression.

No. Trying to push 30TB into Freenet will be interpreted as an attack on the network by other peers and they'll disconnect from your peer.

Freenet is better viewed as a communication medium than a storage medium. Data is prioritized according to demand, somewhat like an LRU cache. You can't upload 30TB and expect the network to preserve it for you.

On liability, running a Freenet peer is more like running network infrastructure that automatically routes and caches other people's traffic than intentionally publishing it. US law explicitly recognizes this distinction in the DMCA's provisions for transitory network communications and system caching. We discuss this in more detail in the FAQ.

You obviously haven't tried Freenet. You can join our room on River and you'll see no spam, no fraud, no hate speech, none of that.

Decentralized doesn't mean unmoderated. Systems built on Freenet can be moderated however their creators and communities want. River is moderated.

The difference is that nobody running one service gets to decide what everyone else is allowed to run.

Domestic panels will get more expensive, too, as they are made from polysilicon.

Yes all the time. Using a Tablo DVR

Why isn't there a second independent AI that examines the main AI's output, and decides if it should be censored or not. If it thinks so, the answer is not delivered.

Since the second one is only looking at the first AI's output it seems like it would be difficult or impossible to fool it, especially if it's window is very short (like only the current message).

I assume there is some reason this does not work. Any explanations?

Those are visible harassment campaigns (and visible on purpose to scare others). He was wondering about ones people don't know about, secret and/or unreported harassment campaigns.

Funny twist on the Fahrenheit novel. AI Capitalism buys books to burn them.

That is something you just made up. In fact you can only have an antitrust ruling based on law and the current news is that the European Court of Justice dismissed a legal complaint from Alphabet against a prior ruling. So we are not anymore on a level where one could make a political argument. The disrespectful remarks of Mr. Walker are unprecedented. You don't attack courts.

This is not voted on by Parliament but Parliament could object to it. Under Article 290 TFEU, delegated acts may supplement or amend non-essential elements of a legislative act. The original legislation must define the objectives, scope, content and duration of the delegation. Parliament and the Council retain control: they may revoke the delegation or object to an individual delegated act. Here we have the Commission using a delegated act, an administrative measure, to amend the European law, without meeting the prerequisites:

"Such delegated acts shall be adopted only on account of market developments and technical and scientific progress, and provided that there are scientifically grounded concerns over the safety of end-users removing or replacing the portable battery, or in cases where there is a risk that the removal or the replacement of the battery by end-users would be in violation of any product safety requirements provided for by applicable Union law."

This is a shady legal base for the current action, so this would blow up if scrutinised by Parliament or Council. Furthermore, there is really no point of communicating to trading partners in the way that it has been done, which casts a very bad light.

Kent Walker does not appear to know how to speak to European Commission authorities. This is so rude and disrespectful.

I wish the European Union would take similar action. Mario Draghi claimed he wanted to solve the issue 20 years ago. Time to revisit it.

https://competition-policy.ec....

Anyway, the task would be to make AutoCad obsolete and this requires substantial investment.