>Individual economies such as India, Viet Nam, and Saudi Arabia exhibit adoption curves that differ markedly from the global average. As the APNIC Labs data shows, this global trend does not necessarily reflect the experience of individual economies.

>APNIC’s own measurement records a 42% worldwide IPv6 capability (Figure 2). That’s a substantial difference, which also needs clarifying."

The nuance is that IPv6 is growing faster in developing countries with poorer economies. I'm guessing this is because building modern IPv6 network from scratch is cheaper & more efficient than acquiring scarce and expensive IPv4 addresses. This is a major advantage for newer providers in growing economies.

So while the Google is showing it at 50%, APNIC's weighted global measurement shows it at 42%.

TEMO will more than likely just pass the cost of this onto EU consumers.

>*Full legal indemnification: *Through our offshore subsidiary in a jurisdiction that doesn't recognize software copyright*

Heh, ok. So, the thinking is:

1. You contract them.

2. The actual Copyright infringement is done by an __offshore__ company.

3. If you get sued by the original software devs, you seek indemnification from the offshore subsidiary.

4. That offshore subsidiary is in a country without copyright laws or with weak laws so "you're good!"

...

5. Profit.

This is a ridiculous legal defense since this "one-way-street" legal process will almost certainly result in you being sued first... the company actually using the infringing code.

The indemnification is likely worthless since the offshore company won't have any assets anyway and will dissolve once there's a lawsuit and legal process is established.

The "guarantee" is absurd: Their "MalusCorp Guarantee" promises a refund and moving headquarters to international waters if infringement is found. This is not a real legal remedy and is written to sound like a joke, which is telling about their seriousness...

This whole "clean room as a service" concept is a legal gray area at best. In practice, it's extremely difficult to prove tha ta "clean room" process was truly clean, especially with AI models that have been trained on vast amounts of existing code (including the very projects they are "recreating").

The indemnification is a marketing gimmick to make a legally dangerous service seem safe. It creates a facade of protection while ensuring that any financial liability stays with you, the customer who wants to avoid infringement .

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47295679

Points: 4

# Comments: 1

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46908070

Points: 10

# Comments: 0

After I read this article, I thought this whole incident is fabricated and created as a way to go viral on tech sites. One immediate red flag was: why would someone go to these lengths to hack a freelancer who's clearly not rich and doesn't have millions in his cryptowallet. And how did they know he used Windows? Many devs don't.

Ah, you might say, maybe he is just one of the 100 victims. Maybe but we'd hear from them by now. There's no one else on X claiming to have been contacted by them.

Anyway, I'm highly skeptical of this whole incident. I could be wrong though :)

I'm not sure if there are any sites tracking this. Anyway, I need to buy 30TB of storage this year so I can upgrade my NAS and make it last few years. Thanks for any replies from anyone who has an opinion!

Basically, in 1919, Henry Ford sought to reinvest the Ford Motor Company’s profits into raising employee wages and expanding hiring, arguing that sharing success with workers would strengthen the economy and the company’s long-term prospects. However, minority shareholders John and Horace Dodge (who also ran their own competing auto company) sued Ford, claiming that his actions violated the fiduciary duty to maximize profits for shareholders.

The Michigan Supreme Court ruled in favor of the Dodges, declaring that a corporation’s primary obligation was to serve the financial interests of its shareholders and not broader social goals or even the well-being of its employees. This decision established a legal precedent that continues to shape corporate law even today and reinforcing the doctrine of "shareholder primacy" and limiting the ability of companies to prioritize stakeholders (like workers or communities) over investor returns.

It's been downhill for employees since.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dodge_v._Ford_Motor_Co.

[0] https://github.com/sorin-ionescu/prezto