I suppose to be fair the UK isn't so much better. The police can make these requests themselves. They have an oversight group, but they rubber stamp everything it seems. Hundreds of thousands of requests per year.

Most Chinese phones use Android. Google could be huge there, but choose not to be.

They gave the Chinese government access to Chinese user's data years ago. They don't seem to have an issue with governments gaining warrantless access to their systems.

If you care about privacy, go Android. Google does require warrants, and doesn't operate in China due to the warrantless access requirement.

It will, you can side load them.

Mine is a Pro as well. They just keep failing on me. One stopped seeing the remote after boot for a few minutes, and the other stopped getting any network connectivity (wired or wireless) for several minutes after boot.

The Mi Box is just an Android TV box, so you can run Kodi and use whatever network sharing method you like.

Aren't they Wallmart's own brand, as in innately shit?

I've liked Panasonic TVs before, but now they have sold the business to a Chinese company I will have to properly evaluate one when the time comes. My main Panasonic is from 2012 and still going strong. It's used as a dumb display with an Nvidia Shield, which Nvidia has replaced twice outside of warranty. Their hardware may be unreliable crap, but at least they give you a replacement for free.

Honestly, if you don't care about games, get a Mi Box, not a Shield.

If you don't have a Wallmart account, it becomes a dumb TV, which is a significant improvement for many people.

The analogy doesn't really work for two reasons. Firstly copyright infringement is a civil matter, not criminal. Secondly they were informed about the copyright infringement, but declined to cut off the customer. It was a request to stop providing service that was allegedly being abused, going against their own Terms of Service.

This is still the right decision. Aside from it being bad if companies can be forced to enforce their own ToS, there has never been a trial to determine if the copyright infringement actually took place, and if the right person was identified. These claims are notoriously unreliable.

Television wasn't nearly do addictive as social media. For a start, it's a one way medium. Social media lets you respond. The closest TV gets is stuff like phone poll voting, which was heavily regulated in a lot of countries.

Lockheed focuses on reliability of weapons, rather than quantity. As we have seen in Ukraine and now in Iran, quantity is often more important. Ukraine uses a lot of civilian grade material in drones, for example, as does Russia. Shear numbers and low cost are more important than military grade component reliability.

Centrifugal gravity doesn't really work. The Soviets experimented a lot with it, and the US did a little bit too.

Mars is the place to go. Decent amount of gravity for humans to live on, resources to live off.

So for example, say you use the hidden partition feature. You have two encrypted partitions, one with your really secret data, and one other with some other data that you don't mind if your adversary gets hold of. Under duress you give your adversary the password to the latter.

In the UK, the prosecution can argue that the data you gave up is not all there is, and you are holding some back. As evidence, they can point to things like lists of recently accessed files that seem to point to data on that hidden partition, or the fact that the data you did give up has not been touched in a very long time and there is evidence that you were using the computer recently.

It's not a given that they can prove there is more data beyond a reasonable doubt, but you do have to be careful to avoid mistakes that can give them what they need.

Hidden data is an interesting idea, but you need it to be plausible. The fake data has to have signs of regular, recent use, for example, or they can argue that you haven't given them the real key. The same issue with claiming to have forgotten the password, when there is evidence that you used it recently.