I mean, you're also telling them almost every site you visit. That's strictly worse from a privacy perspective than blocking ads outright.

It would just cut the rates they'll pay to account for the erroneous clicks. I guess that might just be limited to defunding the sites popular with the really techy group of people that use Adnauseam and instead shift to niches with better effectiveness.

It's actually down to $3.8B in profit now, and will be losing money within a year at the rate its been losing profitability.

Nobody was pressing (or even alleging) crimes by the sheriff AFAIK.

I literally cannot count the number of times I put my Linux computer to sleep and it just doesn't wake up, and I have to hard reset the power to get it to do anything. I would never leave anything unsaved open for an extended period of time on a graphical Linux system.

Happens 90% of the time on my standard Elitebook laptop when I run windows. It just crashes and has the fan going crazy. On Linux it's been fine since day one, some 5 years ago.

But this is a bug, and it's very different from the OS voluntarily rebooting without your consent.

The nice thing about Linux is not waking up from sleep is a bug. On windows, the restarts at inopportune times is a feature!

That's not nice to have unfixed bugs like that, but more to your point - not a sign of a serious OS

Actually no. Linux pretty closely follows the ACPI standard. The issue is that ACPI implementors specifically work around bugs in Windows, which does not follow the standard well and has its own quirks. Thus, in order to make Linux 'work' with the broken hardware, they'd have to add bugs. Again, we see the issue with Microsoft dominance. A serious OS would implement the standard as written, not demand that others follow its bugginess.

Criminals? I'm not sure what you're looking for.

"Criminals do the most crime" is a tautology

That's why it's a silly question.

Most Android devices also don't have aux ports. iPhones have USB now too.

Losing the ability to easily sideload apps is what we're talking about.

How do iPhones have worse security than Android???

Is so far as you don't have to use the site, that's true, but they are legally enforceable, and you could absolutely be sued for breaking them if you upset eBay enough.

Then most websites can sue OpenAI and Anthropic, but in reality, they can't.

My understanding from hiQ v. LinkedIn is that it depends on whether you have access controls contingent on the terms' acceptance. If you have to make an account and agree to the terms to view content or place bids, it's illegal to violate what you agreed to. If you didn't explicitly agree to anything, you don't bind yourself by viewing the site, so breaking them isn't illegal. However, robots.txt qualifies as an access control and therefore is legally binding, so if an AI company is breaking that, they probably could be sued (see: eBay v. Bidder's Edge), but OpenAI follows robots.txt to my knowledge. Maybe the Internet Archive would be liable.

I haven't followed all the appeals though, and I'm not your lawyer.

You mean to process it or to make up stuff to satisfy the regulators?

In roles where you're trusted with a lot of power over other people, absolutely. You won't get fingerprinted in a restaurant or store, but everyone in a hospital or a school should be.