I’ll agree with that. Convoluted nonsense for the sake of being convoluted is very rarely good writing. There’s some stuff with more complexity and longer developing story-lines, but the minute to minute reading should still flow even if you don’t see how the big picture is going to develop.
Or the subject matter is advanced.
I’ve read a lot of material on quantum physics and it’s still mostly word salad to me.
They’re asking for a jury trial. That’s what I’m referring to.
The scary part is that they think (and are probably correct) that they have a good chance of convincing a random jury that it’s totally fine.
You can, trivially, with a handful of very small, completely unobtrusive adapters.
There is literally nothing redeemable about USB A’s design.
Because USB-A sucks donkey balls and needed to die in a fire.
Holy hell.
Even by the standard of “all software patents are nonsense”, these are a fucking joke.
The problem is that when the other side is a madman who would rather end civilization than lose an ounce of power, you’re fucked.
Ranked choice is how you get to vote for a candidate that actually consistently has policies you agree with without being the same as not voting.
It sets an absolutely obscene precedent that a government can globally restrict information. Even global terrible actors like Russia and China haven’t succeeded at that.
Yes, that precedent is 1000 orders of magnitude more harm than India losing access (which they won’t, because the entirety of Wikipedia is open source and would be mirrored in the country instantly. But even if they actually would, it is literally impossible to get anywhere near the harm of the precedent this sets).
Being available elsewhere is entirely irrelevant. Wikipedia must stand against totalitarian censorship to resemble a reputable organization.
Complying is unforgivable.
They not only can, trivially. They unconditionally must.
It is not possible to ever be a reputable organization ever again if you have to choose between censoring content globally for an authoritarian government and shutting down in that country, and censoring content globally is something they genuinely consider. Open, fact based information is their entire reason for existing.
No, I have no interest in digging through their history. But it’s less than trivial to do. Any random no name site can do it in 5 minutes with any source of the geo-mapping information, with virtually no knowledge required. It is not work.
GDPR can do literally nothing but block any site that doesn’t have finances under their jurisdiction, and they shouldn’t be able to. No one else will enforce their fines for them. It’s no different than Russia fining Google more money than exists. You can’t just magically rob someone because you’re a country.
Yes, they do. They’ve done it in the past.
It literally doesn’t matter what Indian courts rule. Being banned from India is orders and orders of magnitude more acceptable than blocking a single article anywhere else on the planet. It single handedly eliminates all of their credibility.
India isn’t capable of enforcing fines against an organization that doesn’t operate in their country and there’s no chance a US court will enforce such an unhinged judgement. They can’t be forced to pay.
They already have the capability to block content locally.
There isn’t a worse option than allowing a government to globally block an article.
You can’t give a deranged dictatorship global censorship authority.
That keeps the entire planet from access to information.
Everywhere else on the planet, in order for a device to be cleared for sale, that specific model undergoes heavy testing for regulatory compliance by a government agency.
“The specs said it was fine” is literally never going to be a valid legal defense, and making that argument will get you laughed out of court. Either it’s actually certified to be used as you’re allowing it to be used, or you get the hammer dropped on you, as you should.
The carrier doesn’t decide that.
I literally quoted the part that required carriers to block ineligible phones.
They should have just blocked India.
Censoring factual articles globally is an extremely bad precedent to set for yourself.
There’s a place for more formal writing.
But the point of using precise, formal language is the intent behind it. If you’re just RNG-ing it it loses all meaning.