warbler73

That is not acceptable.

How does Google "own" this "market"?

Any gTLD whatsoever owned by some for profit corporation is not acceptable.

Why should any TLDs at all, like .dev and .app, be owned by Google?

> domain extensions like .dev and .app are owned by Google

Why are domain extensions like .dev and .app owned by Google?

Why do you think people without passports (or uncomfortable uploading government documents to nearly every website they wish to use) should not be allowed to use those websites.

> Most people satisfy the "two forms of identification" requirement

53% of US adult citizens have a passport as of 11/22. Most of them have a state ID as well. So yes, a bare majority of citizens will be allowed internet access.

I have never seen a library card or insurance card with a photo id that is accepted as id at all, much less valid id. Do you have examples and if so how common is this in Texas?

"Man's got a point. Two is no good. Let's make it three photo ids." - Texas Legislator Tex

"Hole up there son, we don't want to have to revisit this every year to patch holes. Let's put in a safety margin: Five photo ids." - Texas Legislator Champ

> This might not only be about protecting the children.

When you have verified name and address of every user you can charge a lot more for ads.

Uh oh. Is it that obvious?

I like to roll this way! (Just not at work.)

    SELECT
      employee_name
    , company_name
    , salary
    , state_code
    , city
      FROM 'employees';

You're right, they acquired Mojang and its transferable assets. But those assets don't include the implied license since there is no contract saying it is a transferable license.

> he implicitly assigned a transferable non-exclusive license to Mojang

This is almost correct. If this was decided in the US, his discussions and acceptance of payment gave Mojang a non-transferable license. During the sale to Microsoft, he was a stakeholder. Microsoft failed to acquire a license, which was why they were trying to force him to sign a contract with terms - of perpetual transfer - that he did not agree to. Mojang needed that signed otherwise Microsoft needed to negotiate a license or purchase from him directly. Microsoft did not do this so they don't own it nor did they have the right to distribute his work until he public-domained it. They are still guilty of infringements up to the date he public domained it, but he seems to have released he right to pursue this as part of this essay.

In the US for copyright to transfer he'd need to be an employee and writing part of his work duties, in which case it is work for hire, or if he is a contractor they'd need a signed contract saying the contractor was performing this as work for hire, or a contract explicitly transferring ownership. They did pay him for it so Mojang had an implied license to use it but he retains ownership.

When Mojang sold Minecraft to Microsoft, they did not own the copyright and did not have a contract saying they have the right to transfer their implied license, therefore Microsoft actually is violating copyright here.

Source: I went through exactly this same legal scenario and won.

US to follow in some way, not hijabs, but some other issue.

> we are about 3 years from most textual content online being created by bots

0 years.

Yes. I've been booking back country camping and trail access for a couple of years now and at no time did I suspect the money was going anywhere other than the National Park Service and BLM to support the programs and sites. I never would have imagined significant amounts, in some cases the majority of funds collected at a .gov park service site was going to a for profit defense contractor. In fact the site states in places that fees go to support the parks. No where does it say fees go to support for profit defense contractors.

recreation.gov is a .gov site. Which is supposed to mean it is owned by the government and not a private run site collecting fees for a for-profit defense contractor.

It is good to bail out the ultra rich! Because when has the US done differently!

Basically we are talking about TV dinners and fast food. Meat is cheaper and better in this realm than the expensive and highly processed vegetarian stuff.

I'm fine with either but I don't eat much fast food or TV dinners.

For homemade the processed fake meat is more expensive and harder to work with than just grilling some steaks.

There's no shortage outside Canada.

> if he's so certain of his innocence and has all this supporting evidence

The claim is that he is a child pornographer and has taken sexually explicit photos of children for prurient purposes. There is no evidence of this and if Google had it they should report the evidence.

You instead keep repeating things like "if he's so certain of his innocence and has all this supporting evidence...", implying that since he is not suing Google that there must be something to this.

Your shtick here reminds me of Musk's accusations of pedophilia against Vernon Unsworth.

You continue to insinuate it.

Why do you continue to insinuate this man may be a pedophile when he has been completely exonerated?

> The Dad has legal path(s) to take if he feels he was truly wronged. Paths that would ultimately cost nothing if he prevailed. Paths that would likely force Google to undo their decision if Dad's statements are in fact the truth and Google has no other data/evidence.

San Francisco Police Department:

> “I determined that the incident did not meet the elements of a crime and that no crime occurred,” Mr. Hillard wrote in his report. The police had access to all the information Google had on Mark and decided it did not constitute child abuse or exploitation.

What more do you want from him Alupis? He was exonerated but you are suggesting he did not "do any of that" (false) to clear his name. Why would you say this given the article already rules it out?

Apple's Photos app tried to tell me that my child was my lover in their photo event labeling, which really pissed me off a lot.

What could possibly go wrong.

> tldr: we stick to C89 for now.

Cool.

"Rotating is hard!"

> the Non-Working Class

The Aristocracy.

Them that are better than us common people. They who are comfortably idle.