If not, why not just say "we aren't a UK based organization so we have no obligations under this law"

Let the UK block Wikipedia.

One internal site I spend hours a day using has a 10.x.x.x IP address. The servers for that site are on the other side of the country and are many network hops away. It's a big company, our corporate network is very very large.

A better definition of "local IP" would be whether the IP is in the same subnet as the client, i.e. look up the client's own IP and subnet mask and determine if a packet to a given IP would need to be routed through the default gateway.

I'm worried businesses are going to use tariffs as an excuse to have a fake list price, then hit you with massive hidden fees at the point of sale. Some sectors have been doing this for years - "service fees" at restaurants, "regulatory response fees" in the telecom industry, all sorts of nonsense in event ticketing.

Physical goods have mostly been spared this type of fake pricing - aside from sales tax not being included, but that's been universally true in the US forever so everyone is used to it.

Tariffs could be the end of that if businesses see sales plummet. Especially because these scams actually work - the reason restaurants give for not just increasing their menu prices is because higher listed prices drive people away.

That's too generous. "Not your personal army" started because 4chan had a well-earned reputation for harassment - usually raiding other web sites, but often targeting individual people who caught their attention for one reason or another.

The "not your personal army" slogan came about because people who were very aware of this reputation were showing up, hoping to make a web site or person they disliked the next target. That got annoying fast, hence they told those people to go away.

It wasn't a moral stance against target harassment - far from it. It was a stance that the group mind will choose the next target when they feel like it - not because some rando is mad at their ex or something

This was a user-empowering application of the vulnerability. Obviously, a bug that allows root-level arbitrary code execution just by getting the user to load a single image could be used for some pretty bad stuff. (And perhaps was.)

It's not hard to imagine some foreign intelligence agency is sitting on some severe zero-day vulnerability, waiting to use it on very high value targets, such as senior administration staff.

Any system where the government doesn't have total control over software deployment will never be viable for handling claasified information.

Amazon may not be actively hostile to using their SDK with third party services, but they never promised to support that use case.

(disclaimer: I work for AWS but not on the S3 team, I have no non-public knowledge of this and am speaking personally)

I actually can see some situations where on-demand private security would be useful. Say you need to retrieve your belongings from your abusive ex-partner's place (and imagine you're on the lease/deed so you have the right to enter without their permission) - having an escort could be useful if the person is violent.

However... situations like that don't seem to be what this app is going for?

> Every booking comes with a motorcade and users get to select the number of Escalades that’ll be joining them as well as the uniforms their hired goons will wear.

It honestly seems like it's for people wanting to LARP as being powerful and important. Which is fine (as long as no one gets hurt), but how big of a market is there for that?

Even if you understand intellectually that a pay increase is a cost of living adjustment, that doesn't mean it isn't disheartening to see your new earnings being eaten up by inflation.

Copyright includes the creation of derivative works, not just literally copying the source material.

For instance, imagine I read a novel, then I decide to write my own, unauthorized sequel to it. It's not a literal "copy" of the original material - it's my own original text, but obviously a derivative work of the original material. Under copyright law, that would be infringement - I would be sued if I tried to sell that. (Yes, that means fanfiction is infringing, but most rights holders have wisely decided to look the other way on that, as long as it's non-commercial.)

This is what people who claim AI is infringing are worried about. Not that the AI has a literal copy of the source material in its training data, but that the training data can be used to produce a derivative work.

I could write a (crappy) fanfic of the Lord of the Rings without directly referencing the books/movies. And that doesn't mean I have a complete copy of the books/movies in my head - that isn't how memory works. Until now, creating a derivative work without directly using the source material was something only humans could do. This is completely uncharted legal territory.

I.E. if I wrote my own spin-off of a popular book series, which was somehow considered fair use in country A, but considered infringing in country B, the publisher could get it removed from stores in country B.

By the same logic, if AI training is ruled as copyright infringement in the US, it won't matter if the company trains their model somewhere else - if they open a US division to sell service using that model, they'd get sued.

Granted I'm not an IP lawyer and AI IP law is in its infancy - maybe I'm missing something?

AFAIK Chrome has a hardcoded list of DNS servers which offer encrypted DNS. I.E. if your DHCP server tells your PC to use 8.8.8.8, 1.1.1.1, 9.9.9.9, (or the IPv6 equivalents) it will instead connect to the equivalent DNS-over-HTTPS endpoint for that DNS provider. This is a compromise to avoid breaking network-level DNS overrides such as filtering or split-horizon DNS. It's not limited to public DNS providers either, ISP DNS servers are in there. (I've seen it Chrome connect to Comcast's DNS-over-HTTPS service when Comcast's DNS was advertised via DHCP.)

Of course, this is pretty limited. Chrome obviously can't hardcode ever DNS server, and tons of networks use private IPs for DNS even though they don't do any sort of filtering / split-horizon at all. (My Eero router has a local DNS cache, so even if my ISP's DNS servers were in Google's hardcoded list, it wouldn't use DNS-over-HTTPS, because all Chrome can see is that my DNS server is 192.168.4.1)