Note that these two things are not the same. Cancelling a contract does not necessarily remove or deactivate a camera.

The cameras were installed as part of the contract with the municipality (city. state, county, fed, etc.) but are owned and operated by Flock. The cancellation of the contract just means ending the payments for access to the Flock system. It would take further action to order the removal/deactivation of the cameras. Flock is still watching, and other police forces can still use the data they are collecting.

If your municipality says it is "cancelling its contract with Flock", make sure they are actually removing the cameras, not just agreeing to stop subscribing to the Flock system.

The devil is in the details.

When I started in tech, the cycle was Bay Area to New York City to Bay Area.

You could talk your way into an entry level position in a Bay Area tech company just by being available and willing to learn. You could grow your skills but became pigeon-holed as an expert in a narrow function, and unable to progress to a mid-career job.

You had to go east to break that barrier. The companies in NYC were desperate for tech talent, and would take someone with a few years of bay area tech experience as a team leader or senior analyst.

A few years of being responsible for results in a NYC company gave you the opportunity to move back and take a management or senior developer position in a west-coast tech company (CA or WA).

Some of us even took detours thru Texas or Atlanta instead of NY, but the pattern held.

Don't read too much into tech people moving around the country at different stages of their careers, it is just the way it works.

I like it warmer, but his is not what happens. More energy in the system means more extreme events, both cold and hot, wetter and drier.

Increased CO2 levels boost plant growth and size, but does not increase essential minerals and protein, resulting in less nutritious crops.

People see "bigger" and think "better" ...but it is actually "worse".

That is where they have him. He did not invoke his 5th amendment right and remain silent... he gave the federal investigators false information which he knew would result in the destruction of any potential evidence on his device.

If you refuse to give the CBP the password, they will hold you for questioning. They will tell you that you have no choice and that you must give them the password. This is a lie, but they are allowed to lie to you. They cannot refuse entry to a US citizen. They cannot hold you indefinitely (I think they are still bound by the 72 hour limit). They must return your device to you. They can hold it for a few days (and presumably make a clone or try to hack it), but they must return it to you. They will lie to you about all of this. Your attorney will tell you the truth. Demand an attorney, and remain silent until your attorney advises you to speak.

Well, not that shocked.

Using an AI to do your homework gets the homework done without you learning the subject. Then you fail the exam.

Yeah, not shocked at all.

He is famous for getting really really rich as a streamer -and for not turning into a dickhole once he was rich.

Apparently he is actually doing nice things for people with his money (and making even more money doing so.)

Not to be confused with Mr Beast...

Cheap clone gonna cheap clone.

If YouTube wants an exclusive deal with certain creators they can pay for it. Make them a contract offer.

The existing YouTube TOS is a non-exclusive agreement. Netflix is offering a non-exclusive licensing agreement. The two are fully compatible.

Threatening vague consequences for creators who choose to follow the terms of their existing agreements is... problematic.

True. But this is happening in the USA and our high courts are populated with those who claim to be "originalists", while the lower court justices seem to lean twords training as fair use. It's all speculation until we get a supreme court decision... maybe not even then.

That distinction is a recent invention. Copyright originally came about as a response to the invention of the printing press, and the subsequent publishing (for sale) of books without compensation to the authors. It was expressly about distribution for profit.

When we in the US created our copyright laws, we expressly stated the purpose as "to promote the progress of science, art, and useful knowledge." Building on what was done before was the core of US copyright law. ...which is where the idea of "fair use" comes from.

Their argument is (financially) motivated reasoning blatantly ignoring the fact that their artists creations would not exist without the contributions of the artists who came before them.

None of this exists in a vacuum.

Training is analogous to learning. We all learn from others. This is legal.

What is not legal is reproducing and selling someone else's work without permission (copyright infringement), or claiming someone else's work as your own (plagiarism is also copyright infringement).

Self correcting problem. Since cancer is not contagious, I have no problem with people choosing not to seek treatment for themselves. The collateral damage of their family members is unfortunate.

Yes. That is pretty much textbook ragebait. Sites love it, because people reading and replying = engagement = more advert impressions = more money and power.

As for the ragebait vs echo chamber debate? I dunno. Both seem bad to me. Neither will inform anyone or change anyone's mind. Ragebait induces people to double down on their wrongthink, while echo chambers reinforce their wrongthink.

I suggest we pass on both.

I am picturing cars full of Taylor Swift fans ramming and running off the road other cars that are not playing the new album on release day... Fatality!