Is poker "gambling", when skill matters more than the luck of the draw? The worst hand at the table can still win.

For that matter, is the stock market as a whole gambling? And I don't mean that in the typical whiny "waaah, I suck at picking stocks, this is gambling" we often hear; rather, the winners are simply making better use of the available information than the losers.

Relating that back to Spagnuolo - Did he place the bet after all the numbers were compiled and not yet released, or did he make what amounts to good guess based on largely public information he just happened to have a better way to access than you or I? The former would potentially be insider trading (if not for the jurisdiction argument, which is pretty damned solid); the latter just means the losers need to git gud at finding that information.

"A kid growing up today will never be smarter than AI, but he or she will also never have understood a world where every product and service that they interact with is not really smart and really capable and really helpful,"

OK, so show us these really smart AI things. When I have to describe in 3 different ways to the AI bot that the Amazon order is wrong, and something a human would have picked up instantly....that does not sound 'really smart' to me.

The worst part isn't even whether or not Eats / Doordash suck (and make no mistake, they do) at their core purpose - It's that virtually every restaurant traditionally known for delivering has realized they can cut that nonsense right out of the budget and just push everyone to use a third-party delivery service at the customer's expense.

I know I'm going to sound like a cranky old man here, but once upon a time, food delivery was a sweet job for a late teen / early 20-something - Drive around town rather than being stuck in a kitchen, busting their butts to get the food to you while it was still warm, and were thrilled to get tipped a five. Now, if you only tip these professional "food ransom services" a twenty, you can expect to scrape your food off the garage roof and be named-and-shamed on IG for being such an insufferable asshole as to not pay more for the delivery than the food. And even if you tip "enough" to avoid the wrath of your driver, it's guaranteed to be late, cold, and in way too many cases to be coincidental, missing a few fries / nuggets / whatever. Go ahead and complain, and they'll just ban both the driver and the customer, and good luck getting a refund.

But hey, I have nothing to complain about since I live more than 10 minutes outside a city core, nobody will accept the delivery anyway.

Oh, goody, the website selling our licenses is down. Whelp, toothpaste back in the tube, we can all rest easy knowing that the day is saved!

Of course, the next obvious step if they can't sell them is to simply release the entire batch into the wild. And how dare any of you think this might somehow be the fault of sweet innocent idscan.net for inadequately protecting the highly sensitive data they were grudgingly entrusted with in the first place.

We need a hell of a lot more CEOs in prison, and we need any politicians that requires / supports / allows this bullshit to join them. Of course, absolutely none of that is going to happen because Joe Sixpack has zero clue any of this is going on; and even if he somehow catches wind of it from a Facebook meme, oh well, it's just one more breach, who cares, he gets notices of those on a monthly basis and has been intentionally trained to treat them as junk mail.

Fine, we'll do this the tedious way, since you Meta/etc shills are happy to prove they're incapable of inductive reasoning.

Foreign scammers do not care about the law. Social media CEOs play fast-and-loose with the law and consider fines just a cost of doing business. Governments consider themselves above the law. The "good guys" didn't need this law in the first place.

"You may not use this service unless you're 13 or over" - Poof, every 12YO is suddenly 35. See the problem with your hypothesis?

I know this will come as a shock to many, but porn sites aren't the problem here, merely the lowest hanging "for duh kidz!!1!" excuse available to push these adult-privacy atrocities through - If anything, they tend to be some of the best actors in this situation, if only because they're the most closely watched by puritanical assholes. I trust PornHub far more than I trust Twitter, and I trust Twitter far more than anything ending in .ru, .il, or .in.

Sounds an awfully lot like you're agreeing with me here. Are you referring to a specific situation you'd like to cite?

To the best of my knowledge, gambling requires having some way to pay. Kids aren't laundering birthday cash from grandma so they can place a trifecta on the ponies, dude. Meanwhile, this will have zero effect on gambler-in-training gatchas that let kids bet on loot boxes via Play / iTunes gift cards.

Pbpbpbttttt! I know you are but what am I?
Christ you trolls are tiresome.

For me, price is not the killer. Even if it were $50, I wouldn't. Or even free.
AI + camera toothbrush? No thanks. Far too many ways for data to go awry.

You're funny. Tell me, how many under-13s do you think are on FB, despite not being allowed? Hint: All of them.

And I'll be sure to let the offshore scammers know it's illegal, I'm sure they'll be quaking in their boots.

a smart toothbrush that uses a tiny camera and on-device AI

How about no? Does no work for you?

Kind of getting that impression, yes. Maybe I'm missing something, but there's only one celebrity who I consider to be in any way influential in AI, and that's only because he has a second career as POTUS and could cause all sorts of regulatory roadblocks if he wants to. Otherwise, celebrities might encourage AI adoption, but that doesn't make you an AI leader. It makes you a promoter/marketer.

Okay, I'll feed the troll: I choose to comment on Slashdot. I also choose not to use less privacy-respecting platforms like Facebook. And make no mistake, I'm under no delusion Slashdot-the-company has been anything more than yet another data harvesting endeavor since CmdrTaco sold it.

I do not have a choice in whether or not Flock misreads my license plate and I'm arrested at gunpoint as a direct result - Or worse, which will eventually happen; and Flock somehow magically bears zero liability because hey, their contract admits they're unreliable and requires users to do their own due diligence. Which absolutely none of them do.

Sorry - To be clear, I wasn't disagreeing with you. Quite the opposite, I was basically expanding on "There is something dodgy going on".

Peace, friend!

The next most rational alternative, MuKLinux, could be problematic for Greek reasons as well. :-D (mu = micro)

[*waves at another old friend*]

It's probably worth clarifying that this was done by Tim Cook in his previous job as senior VP of operations, and was long complete by the time he became CEO. But yes.

And your problem is apparently an inability to figure out that two plus two equals four.

First, those age brackets are necessarily dynamic or the OS would be out of compliance the day after installing - Because y'know, people tend to age one day per day, at least until we have space stations orbiting Sgr-A*.

And second, if you visit Facebook the day before you turn 18 and the day after, whaddya know, they magically now know your actual birthdate without ever needing to be explicitly told. This ain't rocket science, dude (space stations orbiting the nearest supermassive black hole aside).

That's really the biggest question in all of this - What means of enforcement on the end-user will end up attached to this?

I suspect the vast majority of us are just as fine with lying to Microsoft as we are with lying to Facebook. And as a privacy freak myself, the law itself honestly sounds about as tame as we could have hoped for (short of no law at all); but almost guaranteed Microsoft / Apple / OEMs are already rubbing their hands together and cackling with evil glee over having not just an excuse, but a near-mandate, to demand a license or passport merely to activate a new install.

And what about preexisting installs? At what point is MS itself effectively going to ransomware the very PCs we own for a pic of our license, and what recourse do we have when they invariably brick some fraction of those? Because it will happen.