Most likely.

If so, he has won the stupid prize for playing a stupid game.

He's a cockatiel. The coloring is usually more indicative of a female, but they don't have hard rules like that.

I don't think its that rare, but its not common. Usually it means that the client is breaching their agreement. Often that breach is in the form of they lied to the lawyer. Lawyers have confidentiality, so the only reasons to lie are external to the case itself.

Could also mean Lindell stopped paying them, probably for money troubles.

I'm not sure but the mandatory arbitration lindell himself put in said to pay the guy, so it was as rigged as lindell could get it without it being illegal, and they still felt it was well-proven, and lindell should pay.

My wife named my bird Rizz.

She says I finally have rizz.

It's a bit different because of the stated values though.

Raspberry pi's foundation is focused on making computers available broadly, while this new organization is focused on making privacy widely accessible.

While both can be commercialized, the pi's foundation has no fundamental problems with selling out privacy or focusing on money to achieve those goals. Proton would have a much harder time arguing that profiting from sale.of private data supports privacy.

This is relevant because it means even if the remaining shares end up on the stock market, the foundation can use its majority ownership to veto any privacy concerns.

Time will tell. I could also have missed something

A company with a public offering basically cannot refuse a large enough buyout because with a public offering comes a financial responsibility to the shareholders. Public stock is a contract saying give me money and I'll do my best to make you money back, and it's very legally binding.

You can avoid this by never going public, but that also means you basically don't get big investors for expanding what you can offer. A public offering involves losing some of your rights as owner for cash.

When the legal goal becomes "money above all else", it is hard to justify NOT selling all the data and violating the trust of your customers for money, customer loyalty has to be monetizable and also worth more.

Proton has given a majority share to a nonprofit with a legal requirement to uphold the current values, not make money. This means that the remaining ownership can be sold to whoever, the only way anything gets done is if this foundation agrees. It prevents everything associated with a legal financial responsibility to make money, but still allows the business to do business things and make money, which seems to be proton's founder's belief, that the software should be sold to be sustainable.

Seems solid.

It doesn't change a ton, but the point was basically them putting their money where their mouth is and saying "now we can't sell out like everything else."

If you liked them before, this is great. It means google or whoever literally can't buy them out, it's not about the money. If you were iffy already because they're not FOSS or whatever other reason, this doesn't change that, either, for better or worse

Right. If he had, he'd have been screwed by the hospital later, which is why he didn't.

It is.

If he accepted it, he'd no longer have an argument with a strong foundation. He could still sue, but a lawyer could argue they already made it right.

Exactly the same logic as a 1$ inheritance, it shows that this was dealt with, so the law doesnt have to deal with it again.

That'd be a possibility, yeah. Just a possibility, but very interesting nonetheless.

Estimates vary but seem to be between 5 and 10 cents per brick.

Lego definitely makes a profit, but they also haven't done the usual thing for a business to do, make the product cheaper to squeeze more out of it. In fact, one of the reasons to choose lego over another is the tight tolerances they have for their Legos, they fit better and hold better than a knockoff.

So like, yeah, business, they're trying to make money, but its not the clear-cut fake inflation thing going on, or even necessarily price gouging, as far as I could determine. Its more, this is what a quality product costs, they haven't cheaped out, but it just feels so prohibitively expensive because people aren't paid enough in general.

No one else showed up to the meeting I hosted last Tuesday specifically to select one person to control where all the people go.

I have vested in Greg full authority to define citizenship. He could deport you to anywhere on earth in a moment, so you better show him respect. He's right next to me, watching me type, but let me assure you I am under no threat to type this, no sir, no Marianas Trench deportation for me.

Every reward can be dystopian.

To use it usefully, you should judge if this situation shouldn't have ever existed by your moral views.

So for instance, "billionaire gives graduating class free college" has the situation where college debt is horribly crippling, and that if we taxed the money billionaires have accumulated, then college could've been paid for with that anyway, without relying on a single person's generosity.

This situation, though, could happen in any society. The baby being at risk can happen to anyone and is a mistake on the parents part. A man saw a baby in danger, and risked breaking bones, possibly death, to secure the baby. That's behavior France wants to reward, and they offered something within their authority.

The only argument I can see to contrast that would be something like "immigration should always be allowed" or similar, but that's a Greg area.

That's old testament. What Jesus said overrode that.

Its a very common mistake since a lot of christian groups pull their hate from the old testament.

Specifically, Matthew 5:43-48

And, to be clear, worshipping another god remains a sin in basic Christianity, its just not an excuse to not love everyone.

Well they remembered the plot of Frankenstein and boldly applied it to reality to become afraid of a new thing.

I mean a black box would just mean that no one can see it as it processes. Put things in, get things out. As long as their claims are true, this will certainly do that. Same as an onboard AI that we still don't understand.

They're basically saying they won't ship off data to be processed to anyone else. Apple server hardware will process it in data centers.

There's then a further promise that this hardware will be isolated from other things apple is doing, so that no other apple processes not related to AI will be able to see this data.

So, for instance, some other AI company might cut a deal with Amazon, get a discount on AWS processing, and in exchange, let amazon snoop through the data being processed. Or, a company might use a cheaper process in an existing data center that isnt particularly secure, and just not care if its being spied on. I'm sure there's more likely scenarios as well, I'm not a security expert, but apple is promising to thwart any similar thing, by promising the "cloud" for AI is a unique cloud, not just encrypted or whatever, but actually physically separate from everything else

Its the equivalent of saying "this product won't trigger your peanut allergy, we've built a facility that will never see a peanut, so cleaning procedures are easy and accidental contamination is impossible since this product is the only thing made in this factory."

These are still just claims though, not facts, so we'll see.

Interesting.

The paper indicates the forms are specifically limited, in mice there were 15 specific forms they could take.

But still, they evolve between the forms, so yeah, they are equally alive as a digital thermometer. Now they just need to get their act together to beat a tamagotchi.