I did.

> “FTC” may not be independent anymore

It may, or it may not; we don't know. We don't know what EU Courts hold as a criterion for "independence," and we don't know what they will decide regarding that "independence" in light of the new fact that POTUS can fire its chief. People simply aren't good in reading the judges' minds, as evidenced by their going to courts -- if both sides could read minds, there wouldn't be any purpose in going to courts, after all. And don't underestimate the creativity of the courts -- they can align with one side, or the other, or produce an opinion completely different from both sides'.

I understand that the advocacy group in question considers this new fact as evidence that FTC is not independent anymore, but that doesn't matter; we need the courts' opinion, not my opinion or your opinion or the advocacy group's opinion. As stated, what we have in the article are predictions about future; I'm not saying these predictions are wrong and I'm not saying these predictions are right, I'm saying these are simply predictions and not facts.

I meant that it's ok for you and me to disagree.

> I don't know what your point is

My point is this: Shrems III may or may not be filed, if and when it's filed the relevant court may or may not decide to review it, if they decide to proceed they may reach many different conclusions, one of the possible outcomes being a blow-up in the EU-US data transfers. Then we will we be able, with the benefit of the hindsight, conclude that the SCOTUS decision in question indeed blew up the transfers.

But we're not there yet. At this point in time "US Supreme Court Just Blew Up EU-US Data Transfers" is a prediction about the future. It is however written in past perfect tense as if it's already happened. But what's happened is the SCOTUS decision only. Whether it will, or will not, blow up the data transfers — still remains to be seen.

I'm not saying that this will not happen; all I'm saying is that "blowing up of the data transfers" will happen when an actual court will decide that it's the consequence, not when some advocacy group will decide that it's the consequence.

In other words, (a) no, the "US Supreme Court" didn't "Just Bl[ow] Up EU-US Data Transfers" – there's nothing in the decision even remotely addressing the transfers (nor the EU!) – but (b) the situation might progress in that direction (or it might not.)

A work-horse is neither a show-horse nor a race-horse.

Interestingly, if you'd like to see a really cool site that showcases how these crap Tissot movements work, just click the link at the top of this page.

(The Powermatic 80 movement in the entry-level Tissot models is a modified version of ETA 2824 which Ciechanowski is showing on his site.)

The "gateway drug" these days seems to be Tissot PRX. Their quartz models are about half the price of their mechanical ones.

[0] Don't have radio coverage where you live? "There's an app for that" -- or several -- that simulate radio control signals.

Any reader will turn into a brick one day. What matters is what you're getting before that point. For me, I'd rather use Send-to-Kindle and never bother with SD cards again. Naturally, YMMV.

How likely is your opinion to change in the light of the information that, according to the article, it's Ukraine who uses these drones?

I am a daily player, I have scanned something once, the rewards were minuscule, I never did it again. I have that specific vivillon which was hard to get because not many players were from the relevant area even before the current events, and I just can't see how the war is related to any of this.