The similar New England Clean Energy Connect project just came online in January 2026, delivering 1,200 MW (yes, nearly 1.21 gigawatts) from Quebec to New England states through Maine.

*effectively ruled. The SCOTUS declined to take the appeal, leaving in place the lower appeals court ruling.The ruling doesn't specifically include source code, but there's nothing in the ruling (or in copyright law) to suggest an exception for AI-generated source code. It sure sounds like chardet v7 is in the public domain from creation, and cannot be restricted by any license.

May you live in interesting times, but in a boring city

The original report is from July 2019, which was a forecast of revenue that *might* be lost, based on "consumer preferences for various piracy behaviors." There's no reason to believe any of these dollar figures are legit. https://www.parksassociates.co...

Shouldn't the design be in side-by-side 3D format?

Cue augmented reality app link

Except in patent cases, apparently. The SCOTUS is saying that the patent holder, whether defendant or plaintiff, always has the burden to prove that the other party infringes their patent(s).

Correct. The long version: The plaintiff in a patent case is usually the patent-holder, who is seeking damages for infringement. In those cases, the patent-holder-plaintiff already had the burden of proof. In this case, the (potentially infringing) plaintiff is seeking protection from patent infringement lawsuits by suing the patent holder, requiring the (patent holder) defendant to prove that the patents are valid and/or that the plaintiff infringes the patents. Normally (and the appeals court found), the plaintiff would have the burden of proof. According to the appellate ruling, the plaintiff (potential infringer, seeking protection) would have to prove that they were not infringing, or prove that the patents were invalid. The Supreme Court reaffirmed the lower court ruling: The patent holder, whether plaintiff or defendant, must prove that the other party (plaintiff or defendant) infringed the patents, and that the patents are valid.

Ah, Steamboxen, like XBoxen.

Indeed, the Xbox One seems to be still based on taking turns, not sharing. If it's your turn to control the Xbox One in the living room, life is good, and world is your oyster. If it's someone else's turn to control the Xbox One, life is kind of boring and crappy.

According to the incident report, "Mr. Durham advised Kiera told him she was conducting a science fair experiment... Wilmot advised she did not know what would happen when she mixed the ingredients. Wilmot advised she thought it would just cause some smoke." There were no injuries, no damage, not even clear intent. Where is the felony crime here? It's only in the mind of Assistant State Attorney Tammy Glotfelty.

Netflix is facing some hard choices. With Microsoft abandoning Silverlight on its own sites, the writing is on the wall. I say, let Netflix demand anything it pleases, and ignore all such demands. Eventually, Netflix will have to switch from Silverlight to something, and HTML5 is the obvious choice. If Netflix can't get DRM in the standard, they'll still have to find a way to keep streaming using existing standards.

The great thing about HTML5 is that it runs on all devices at no cost unlike Silverlight.

FTFY

Google Glass doesn't just present information; it can record, too. And if you record every little thing you see, it's possible to review and discover small, but critically important events later. For example, one of my college instructors has a child with autism. Video from his child's second birthday party helped make the diagnosis, but more and earlier footage would have helped diagnose it sooner. If my instructor had been wearing and recording with Google Glass every time he saw or watched his child, he would have had a wealth of material for evaluation and diagnosis.

Google never said Android was free software. Google does maintain that Android is open, and they'll release the source code when they think it's ready. Android does not have to meet the FSF's strict definition of free and open source software; it doesn't even use the same license. A reality check by Brian Proffitt: http://www.itworld.com/mobile-wireless/204973/more-partisanship-free-software-leadership