https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2017/10/futur...
82 karma · joined August 12, 2013
https://www.hklaw.com/en/insights/publications/2017/10/futur...
Shanghai Hongqiao to Hangzhou East is about 10 high speed trains per hour, all trains using the same line.
Tokyo to Shin-Osaka is also about 10 high speed trains per hour.
Taipei to Taichung is 8-9 trains per hour, high speed + conventional. Shanghai to Suzhou is similar.
Rome to Florence is 6-7 trains per hour.
Hong Kong West Kowloon to Shenzhen North is 6 high speed trains per hour.
Beijing South to Tianjin is 5-6 high speed trains per hour.
The fact is, all three major browser implementations are open-source and that has allowed any company to come in and release or embed their own browser with minimal effort. Chrome/Blink is dominant but that is not due to technical barriers that make it difficult for other companies to ship their own browsers. In fact it is now easier than ever to do so.
BBC: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-62102223
NY Times: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/08/world/americas/rogers-int...
Reuters (doesn't really count, because HQ is in Toronto): https://www.reuters.com/business/media-telecom/rogers-commun...
NPR: https://www.npr.org/2022/07/08/1110500480/rogers-canada-majo...
Bloomberg: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-07-08/banks-pay...
Call me confused, but I don't really see a crime here? The defendant turned over the data before his resignation and is not accused of actually making an attempt to transfer or sell the data to another party, or conspiring to do so. The only accusation is that he had some files that weren't part of his job to have, apparently. But presumably the internal corporate system allowed him access to it and thus he obtained it without breaching any computer system. Perhaps his workplace policy barred him from downloading files onto a USB drive. But is that considered theft?
> The social network permitted Amazon to obtain users’ names and contact information through their friends, and it let Yahoo view streams of friends’ posts as recently as this summer, despite public statements that it had stopped that type of sharing years earlier.
This information contrasts with a statement Facebook provided in 2018, stating that such data sharing partnerships ended at the end of 2015. That statement itself was correcting an earlier statement stating that such access had ended even earlier.
From https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/facebook-shared-user-...:
> Facebook shared personal information culled from its users' profiles with other companies after the date when executives have said the social network prevented third-party developers from gaining access to the data, the company confirmed Friday.
> The companies had access to the data during a stretch of time in 2015 after Facebook had locked out most developers who build apps that work on its social network. Facebook gave select "whitelisted" companies extensions before they were also blocked from getting its users' personal information.
> Those extensions expired before the end of 2015, Facebook said. The company believes the previously unreported extensions with a select group of companies is consistent with previous statements that Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg has made, including in testimony to Congress, about shielding its 2.2 billion users' personal information from third parties since 2015.
> "Any new 'deals', as the Journal describes them, involved people's ability to share their broader friends' lists — not their friends' private information like photos or interests," Ime Archibong, Facebook's vice president of product partnerships, said in a written statement.
A question for any legal scholars out there: the seizure of the documents would be contempt of court in the US, could it not? The person who was threatened with arrest has the defense of duress, so could the US court charge the MPs who ordered the seizure? I don't think the UK would extradite, but if the MPs were to visit the US without immunity, could they be arrested for violating US law (even though their actions are apparently within their rights under UK law)?
[1] http://www.4-traders.com/TENCENT-HOLDINGS-LTD-3045861/compan...
[2] http://www.4-traders.com/ALIBABA-GROUP-HOLDING-17916677/comp...
[3] http://investors.morningstar.com/ownership/shareholders-majo...
"Circumvention of a technological measure that restricts wireless telephone handsets or other wireless devices from connecting to a wireless telecommunications network ... may be initiated by the owner of any such handset or other device ... solely in order to enable such owner or a family member of such owner to connect to a wireless telecommunications network"
- Unlocking Consumer Choice and Wireless Competition Act, 2014 (https://www.congress.gov/bill/113th-congress/house-bill/1123...)