Michal

Hostile design right there

Are you using the default shade of green, or did you enable higher contrast setting in accessibility? I hear it helps with readability.

The fingerprint is stored on your device. You don't give it to a company.

I feel you. Sometime i want to play white noise or lullaby to my baby on the speaker while listening to podcasts on the buds, but one pauses the other. It's an unnecessary software limitation.

On a related note, it used to be possible to use a splitter to connect two sets of earbuds to watch a movie together on a plane. It's not possible now with Bluetooth, you can output sound to only one device.

Under screen fingerprint reader (pixel 7 pro) . It's a downgrade from reader on the back of the phone (pixel 5). It's slower, less accurate, and worst of all, at night it often results in being flashed with a bright light.

I thought it'd be more convenient having the reader on the front, so i can unlock the phone without lifting it, but most of the time it's a nuisance because i doesn't work as well.

Lol, the ios users will still be subjected to the eye-fucking shade of green when chatting with android users. Apple sure loves to mess with their users.

What do you mean that the search engines contain minimal amount of site's data? Obviously it needs to index all contents to make it searchable. If you search for keywords within an article, you can find the article, therefore all of it needs to be indexed.

Indexing is nothing more than "presenting data to the algorithm" so it'd be against the law to index a site under your proposed legislation.

Wrong. The infringement is in obtaining the data and presenting it to the AI model during the training process. It makes no difference that the original work is not retained in the model's weights afterwards.

This is an interesting take, I'd be inclined to agree, but you're still facing the problem of how to distinguish training AI from indexing for search purposes. I'm afraid you can't have it both ways.

I'd be careful with the "always" part. There was a famous case involving Katy Perry where a single chord was sued over as copyright infringement. The case was thrown out on appeal, but I do not doubt that some pretty wild cases have been upheld as copyright violations (see "patent troll").

Are you really trying to argue against a point by providing evidence supporting it?

What do you think "ingesting" means if not learning?

Bear in mind that training AI does not involve copying content into its database, so copyright is not an issue. AI is simply predicting the next token /word based on statistics.

You can train AI in a book and it will give you information from the book - information is not copyrightable. You can read a book a talk about its contents on TV - not illegal if you're a human, should it be illegal if you're a machine?

There may be moral issues on training on someone's hard gathered knowledge, but there is no legislature against it. Reading books and using that knowledge to provide information is legal. If you try to outlaw Automating this process by computers, there will be side effects such as search engines will no longer be able to index data.

My point was, the same applies to petrol car. They all have infotainment and need spare parts.

Why wouldn't they? You plug it in and keep driving. It's not any different from petrol cars.

To be honest I prefer to use a power bank, it's more convenient than having to swap batteries (i used to do that too) as you don't have to power down the device. And one power bank can power many different devices, so i don't have to buy a new one when i Change phones, and can use the same power bank to charge my earbuds, kindle, smartphone, and a variety of other devices, or lend it to someone.

Having said that, i did have my Nexus 6P battery degrade and had to be RMAd, lucky for me it was within warranty. Battery is the fastest failing component so being replaceable will go a long way in prolonging devices lifetime, but doesn't have to be user-replaceable.