For high power laptops, the relevant USB-PD versions with sufficient wattage are too recent to have penetrated all product lines. But I haven’t seen a new laptop without usb-c charging in a long time. Even laptops that ship with their own bricks support slower usb-c charging as well (this will still be allowed by the EU law). Maybe you can identify a couple that don’t. I wonder how much market share they have and if they even matter.
USB-C is not the final form of charger ports. I’d rather the debate on the next evolution happen within industry, and maybe even play out competitively in the market. If a clear victor emerged and there’s another large, abusive hold out like Apple, then just pass a similar time-limited law.
I reckon it takes the market power of an Apple to hold out on proprietary charging ports. Only reason they held out is 1) keep their accessory licensing revenue stream and 2) introduce friction with Android users (see iMessage). Almost no one else has the kind of market power to do that without pissing users off to their detriment.
Aside from Apple, the voluntary standards process was working. No one else was still resisting USB-C. Can you name some examples?
The law does not apply to all electronic devices. The law only applies to consumer handhelds. That’s mobile phones, tablets, e-readers, earbuds, digital cameras, headphones and headsets, handheld videogame consoles and portable speakers. And at a later date, laptops. It’s hard to think of any popular devices in those categories, aside from Apple’s phones and earbuds, that don’t ship with standard USB chargers.
Given that this whole thing was about forcing one bad player, Apple, to do the right thing, why not sunset these laws in five to ten years? That way, future innovators don’t have to first get this requirement repealed. USB-C is not the be-all end-all of charging ports. Note for example the female connector with the fragile plastic piece in the middle. Better alternatives will emerge but now they have to pass through Euro and Indian bureaucrats.
In the US, classified information only legally binds people with security clearances, and people who are complicit/conspire with them to violate them. But otherwise, you can publish it. There is one legally untested exception, which is nuclear-related restricted data.
So what is your point? Why is automated target tracking bad exactly? I’m not saying it’s not, but I don’t see how your argument is different from “all weapons bad”.
Probably because the Kelly blue book is just sourcing local data and the dealer’s listing had an outsized effect on the average, like another commenter pointed out. KBB is not the be all, end all.
This comment misses the point and just plays with the meaning of “know”. Not that epistemology isn’t interesting, but parent was referring to absolute certainty (contingent on your senses being accurate, of course).
This is normal. You buy a car from a guy on the street, it could break on the drive home and you’re mostly shit outta luck. Even if you have a legal claim (and you usually don’t since the sale is as-is), it’s not worth the trouble and they’re likely to be judgment proof.
On the other hand, dealers usually include a warranty of some kind with their “certified pre-owned” vehicles. And as repeat players, they have a reputation to keep. The manufacturer also imposes further rules on them to protect the car brand.
Fwiw, I strongly oppose laws that protect the dealership business. But this specific thing you’ve noticed is not some grand conspiracy (how would that work anyway?). It’s just rational consumer behavior.
Recycling is a scam. Just about everything you recycle gets sent to the landfill anyway. The only difference is that you feel good about yourself as you sort it into the recycling bin. One exception, I’ve been told, is aluminum.
Not sure what you’re on about, but every provider is going to offer new customers a porting service to encourage you to switch. And with a few exceptions (moving from wired to wired in a new geographic area, or moving certain small rural providers), your old carrier must let the new carrier port the number.
You found the wireless page so that’s all it discusses, but that’s not true. What is true is that for wired providers, you are geographically bound. But you can still take your wired number and port it to your wireless plan and then move wherever.