It’s not about ABS, its about BS like an everything touchscreen, tracking, bullshit subscriptions and the like

Yes. Yes it did.

No, they did not report that in media.

It is about them and their honour.

However, their honour isn’t how they’re percieved and treated by others, it’s how they themselves act. They’re the first ones who should show honour and dignity towards their defendants, clerks, etc.

Angry fits like this one just show the judge got corrupted by power and should either be given time to reflect or disbarred.

but not the misuse of public content

Is that an admission that they don’t own the content others posted on their site?

No.

As the AI said, the l in “LLM” (Large Language Model) stands for lntelligence. (Notice the “l” is a lowercase l).

So, AI is very lntelligent. Gotta give it props for that.

Therefore, AI is very dumb

Canonically hell is a democracy and heaven an absolute monarchy, so the art kind of checks out.

The horse knows and it doesnt care

Which clearly gives them a carte blanche to genocide and apartheid

The only unfair thing about the upcoming election is that this guy is running. And also not in prison, but that’s not directly related to the election anyway.

You’re kidding, right?

Both have to be more than a pebble, right?

Doesn’t Windows give a popup saying “Do you want to extract the folder before funning the executable” anymore?

Dionysius is the smurf in the picture

it’s better to avoid using it and report web compatibility problems

It would be if sites were truly incompatible, but developers know Chrome/Chromium dominates the market and instead of bothering checking compatibility with firefox, they just preemptively block Firefox since that’s an easier “fix”.

That’s assuming the vendor isn’t Google and doesn’t have a vested interest in Chrome hegemony.

Still. Finding a site that doesn’t work and reporting it absolutely is the way to go.

You can bet 300 new uBlock replacements to spring up practically overnight, some of them scams, reducing trust in the Google ecostystem.

Unfortunately it’s a bigger problem.

Google doesn’t plan to block uBlock Origin itself, but the APIs it uses to integrate into Chrome in order to function. This will effectively disable all adblockers on Chrome. uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, it will just have 90% of its functionality removed.

Additionally, this isn’t a Chrome-only change, but a change in the open source Chromium, an upstream browser of Chrome all other Chrome-based browsers use (essentially everything aside from Firefox and Safari themselves).

The change itself is involved in changing the browser’s “Manifest”, a list of allowed API calls for extensions. The current one is called Manifest v2 and the new one was dubbed Manifest v3.

Theorethically Chromium-based browsers could “backport” Manifest v2 due to the open source nature of Chromium. However that is unlikely as it’s projected to take a lot of resources to change, due mostly to security implications of the change.

Vendors of other Chromium-based browsers themselves have little to gain from making the change aside from name recognition for “allowing uBlock”, which most users either wouldn’t care for or already use Firefox, so the loss for Google isn’t projected to be large, just as the gains for other vendors.

TLDR: uBlock won’t be removed from the Chrome extension store, but the mechanisms through which it blocks ads will be blocked. The block isn’t a change in Chrome but in Chromium and affects all Chromium-based brosers (all except Firefox and Safari). Other vendors could change that to allow adblockers but it’s projected to take a lot of time and resources.

That’s why we need right to repair

4. When the patent expires every manufacturer will be using it if they’re forced to by legislation

The nicest part is that according to my (admittedly very limited) knowledge of ancient greek, you’d read Οώθ as “Oof”

They aren’t meant for public roads, just like Teslas.