rcw4256

If the data exists within US jurisdiction, the US government feels (and, in practice, is) entitled to it. Plan accordingly.

The actual report that the Bloomberg article keeps referring to but never links:

https://www.bea.gov/news/2020/gross-domestic-product-1st-qua...

That answer should be unsatisfactory to the court, since it wasn't licensed under the GPL. The rules, in this case, say no use in war.

Yes, but you need to be prepared to take it to court when someone uses your software in war.

FOIA has no real penalties for noncompliance. In Washington State, our public records law has penalties (legal fees + $100 per day of noncompliance), and as a result, state agencies tend to actually follow it.

> Use it in a manner that SpaceX disagrees with and you can expect lawyers.

This is probably true, but it's hard to be certain that they'd prevail. Has this actually been tested in court?

We now have explicit, written authorization from the head of WhatsApp to reverse engineer ("tear through") the binaries. The ToS only prohibits unauthorized reverse engineering. I agree with you that it was disallowed prior to this comment, but I think it's OK now.

Please implement a warrant canary while you still can, before you are legally compelled not to.

> especially career twitter archaeologists who dig up old tweets and put them out of context

Richard Stallman doesn't tweet. What are you talking about?

Previous discussion https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20861948

Apparently you need to fail verification a few times before it'll present the option. I kept giving it bogus phone numbers and eventually a "skip" button appeared.

The Draeger breathalyzer fiasco in Washington State was mentioned elsewhere in this thread. Draeger has consistently resisted attempts to make its source code public. Will you commit to publicly releasing the source code to your "cannalyzer" device firmware?

The complaint doesn't make it clear what happened in this specific case, but Slack's general policy is here: https://slack.com/user-data-request-policy

> It’s no different to software providing both free and premium versions in the same binary. What are you paying for? Not the number of bytes.. the R&D hours behind it.

I think the reason people tolerate this arrangement with software is that they are not actually buying ownership of the IP that this R&D capitalizes; they're buying a license to use that IP.

Here, they're purchasing ownership of an actual car. Tesla is actively denying them full use of something that they own.

It's artificially capped in software.

What good is an iPhone without access to the App Store?

They've already failed to provide necessary post-surgery care, resulting in potentially permanent, intractable medical complications, according to this declaration filed three days ago while she was still imprisoned: https://www.courtlistener.com/recap/gov.uscourts.vaed.405498... (paragraph 13)

Because they're actually tasked (implicitly or otherwise) with protecting capital. In many cases this means enforcing the law, but in cases of corporate misbehavior, usually means ignoring it.

My experience contradicts the article's claims. I don't remember ever turning this on, and when I first learned about Location History (years ago), it was already populated with a significant amount of my location history data. Maybe I did technically agree to it in some piece of fine print or other text I didn't notice, but I contest the idea that legitimate, unambiguous user consent was obtained in all cases.

As a result of this 'theft', consumers now have more bendable phone options.

Ticket vending machines, which sell both ORCA cards and fare tickets, are available at every light rail station.

For BRT, you can pay cash at the time of boarding.

No, you don't have to buy an ORCA card. You can buy a paper ticket for the exact fare at a ticket vending machine, which are available at every Link station.

Parent comment is referring to a ticket vending machine external to the coach, not an on-coach bill acceptor. It does not slow down the route.

Seattleite here. This is false. You can pay for all of the services you named with cash.

You use the word 'legally'. Which laws are you referring to?

Thanks!

Are the actual terms of the student agreement available? I can't find them on your website.

The article is referring to tradeoffs made on evolutionary timescales, not the conservation of precious bodily fluids.

This sounds like a "legitimate interest"[1] and/or "legal obligation"[2], which is a lawful basis for processing personal data under the GDPR, even without explicit consent. Explicit consent only enters into the picture when no other lawful basis for processing personal data exists. You can find a full list of lawful bases at [3].

[1]: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...

[2]: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...

[3]: https://ico.org.uk/for-organisations/guide-to-data-protectio...