Did anyone ask for this? Or will this be yet another AI product shoved down the throats of people that don't want it?

Well that's a different, and entirely solvable, problem.

Hoist the colors, ye scallywag!

https://plasma-bigscreen.org/g...

Unfortunately it doesn't appear to be a drop in replacement for smart TVs, but you can get most of the way there regardless.

I don't trust any smartTV providers. LG may be the target of this story, but I'm sure all of them are guilty of this to various degrees.

"Use my product or else." - Oligarch

I mean, good for them for taking this step. Should extend it through highschool, but the root cause of the problems they're facing isn't AI, it's old fashion real-human stupidity making critical education decisions.

If caught early enough, you can make lifestyle changes which dramatically impact the course of the disease.

Of course, there's nothing stopping you from making these changes now.

Diet, exercise, get off your screens and get some sunshine is always good medical advice.

Laughs in Californian.

Yes, and the point you quoted still stands, they are a starting point.

The always relevant XKCD comic explains it well enough: those laws in that order are essential as the starting point. Different order or missing entirely is guaranteed bad. But as pointed out through all kinds of science fiction writing, there are many ways we can understand they are insufficient.

Right now I'd agree they're exactly backwards, or as the XKCD comic described, on track to become a "killbot hellscape". We need even more rules and regulations than that, but as a set of fairly obvious first steps penned 80 years ago, they're pretty blatantly an essential first draft of baseline rules that are missing today.

As technology improves, the customer experience gets worse.

It's been that way for at least 15 years, probably longer. It's the weirdest damn thing to watch; we have all this power and sophistication, but development houses can't seem to get out of their own way and make a product that doesn't A) Suck balls, and B) gets worse with each iteration.

MS is the most famous example of this, but they're hardly alone in this practice.

If the justification for a new law is "it's for the children", then the law is junk and the politicians behind it are trying to con you with something.

Every single time.

More accurate to say the bill of rights prohibits the government ( largely ) from certain actions.

Taking this a step further, who enforces "human rights" in dealing with businesses and citizens, if not the government? Who's to say that's a good thing anyway. Why can't I restrict access to me and mine from someone saying things I don't agree with? That's if you believe your "human rights" are equally and fairly applied, of course, which we all know they aren't.

No, the only sane approach to something like freedom of speech is to restrict the government and otherwise let people do as they will.

Yes but also no.

The regulation isn't about "taking a cut", but primarily about financial crimes like money laundering and insider trading. Generally there are age requirements, as minors can't buy stocks or enter into futures contracts, though custodial accounts where the minor is authorized to use it are allowed. Every transaction is also associated with registered brokerage companies, every transaction tied to a taxpayer ID and account information. To participate the government requires documentation with a full legal name and government issued ID, and assorted other information to verify the person's identity.

In regulated markets every step has a paper trail can be tied back to a responsible human, the person who could potentially be jailed or fined for financial crimes.

There needs to be accountablity, but there almost never is.

The police and prosecution tend to get consequences casually dismissed, "you win some, you lose some", or "mistakes are human, live and learn." Sometimes lawyers have a professional repremand, very rarely fines, but not time behind bars.

If the man is lucky, he might get compensation for the time locked up, and maybe some of the legal costs. Most likely it will be only a small portion, if at all.

If there is any compensation it won't restore his job, his relationships with friends and family, it won't compensate for the negative experiences in the legal system nor behind bars, it won't compensate for the lost opportunities and missed experience in the time he was detained, and it probably won't be enough for the lifetime of therapy he'll need, and that his family may need.

Yeah, on reading the links, it looks like his lawyers already have a lot of that covered.

The law they are using is 18 U.S. Code 2232, and it's on pretty shaky ground. If you're reading it at non-lawyer eyes, sure the law uses words that seem to fit.

For the current administration, that's all they need to make the accusations.

For the defense lawyers there's going to be a long list of reasons that law doesn't apply, and it's got all kinds of reasons the judge is going to dismiss it. The "Terrorism Response Team" has a rather high burden of proof.