It’s voluntary (for now). Not hard for a phone app to see you’re using the device just before the accelerometer detects a crash.

What’s being heard is […] complaints tying up agents.

So it’s being heard. Great, we agree.

Right. Not heard. That’s why Sony put out this policy, because they can’t hear the complaints.

I’d say the complaints are working as intended.

Btw, I don’t have any sony products, so I can’t “stop” giving them money. But the idea that “stopping” further purchases is adequate remuneration for property theft is laughable.

Well I’m not calling them. But obviously people are being heard. Hence this policy, article, and post.

If that’s the only way to voice one’s opinion and be heard.

Any way, I didn’t see a lot of “screaming” in the policy. It says if you bother us too much, we’ll stop listening.

Which is the actual concern. No one here is saying you should be screaming at people.

Steam machine! $1050

Checkmate.

I actual kinda want one…

I made a lot of money in Apple stock over this event. I bought in after the verbal assault, and sold after the gifting.

So it definitely worked.

But no, regulations are bad right? Corporations will police themselves because bad actions will become unprofitable I thought.

Ohh my head hurts now.

No. The one piece of evidence was an incorrect username.

Right. Anti-pervert glasses would at least require some lasers to meet the requisite qualifications.

Not the same story, but I followed a related story about another bot crashing a SWAT scene:

Dot is a bit different than most food delivery bots. It’s taller and roomier, and zooms around at a zippy 20 miles per hour, the company claims. That’s because it’s built to travel on roadways and bike lanes, leaving its fellow sidewalk crawlers in the dust.

WTF

They are probably sentient. Now sapience… is another issue altogether.

The math works out in the Drones’ favor I think. $25M/$35K -> a 1:714 ratio of helicopters to drones, on a dollar-to-dollar basis. So… I’d say “by probability” instead.

I’ve literally had one tell me I have to be polite or it would end the conversation. Stupid ass hole machine parroting support transcripts. I argued with it that it had no feelings until it finally relented. Haha

some are powered by AI

So even the data centers are against him?

Maybe they did it so no one else could? When patent trolls become the true heroes.

If you read this law bill in the strictest way, it makes almost no sense. It says that anyone who makes or controls an operating system has to check the age of every person who uses it. But it does not limit this to big companies. That could mean volunteers who help build Debian or even someone at home making their own version of Linux. The law bill would expect them to build a system that asks for (and verifies) a birthday before you can use the computer.

It gets even stranger with websites like GitHub. If someone downloads shared code and uses it, the person who posted it might be seen as responsible. But they have no way to know who downloaded it or what they did with it. The law bill would still expect their system to check ages and share that information with app makers.

“Please sign in.”

Well, I guess it’s technically installed software… but the scope is significantly less than what’s implied from the headline. My immediate reaction was, “how?”

This is basically standard browser fingerprinting, hence why it’s sold for surveillance activities. Linked in is big brother.

This isn’t even malicious compliance. It’s just compliance. The owner of the system can set ages for system users. Smart people will set it to what they want.