That isn't a rug pull; people were violating the license and should have know.

Its like being butt hurt about getting a speeding ticket for doing 55 in a 45 that has been a posted 45 for a years, but you ignored it because there was never a cop around before.

Sorry but this is on the people violating the license. These are the same people who would have said "I don't want fuss with FOSS / GNU stuff because it is to hard/not ready/etc". You took something that was not yours, was not being offered without strings, and got burned. To figgin bad, next time someone says "Microsoft", try saying "no" if this was a bad experience.

process per tab was and is a shitty hack, it boiled down to we can't get our code to stop leaking and crashing all over the place so lets just fob the problem off on process isolation.

Sure it works, for machines that have lots of memory (which is just about everything now) but when the whole process per tab thing started it really hit a lot of what had been perfectly usable systems for web browsing very hard, performance wise.

The Windows telemetry team seems to use the lyrics to "Every Breath You Take" as their guiding star. I am sure they see that very few customers are using it. I don't find it surprising they would just quietly discontinue an app, it isnt like its an API or anything other stuff depends on. No need for a presser about it.

Language comparability with COBOL isnt hard. It has well defined standards.

The problem with COBOL is that COBOL programs for the most part don't exist in isolation. They are part of long chains of operations that occur before and after they run, including operations performed by things not COBOL. Hell the SYNCSORT utility is nearly touring complete, so you have all kinds of cases where record sets are sorted, merged, selected, etc before going into some control-break-logic batch process in COBOL. A process that might be reaching into other things itself like DB2.

All of this is defined and knowable by looking at the JCL (In IBM z/OS land anyway, I am not very familiar with other COBOL environments). The challenge here is these frequently captures business rules in an unseen way. "We don't include additional site service visits in our monthly billing invoice, we send them on a separate invoice" Well if you don't recognize the previous job step produces a 'detail file' with the records that have the additional visit code, before the program that creates summary invoices runs you don't recognize that logic anywhere in the program it looks like its just doing some accumulators and control-break on customer-id to produce invoice docs. That is the real challenge with most of these systems the rules are spread all over.

It is not enough to just be able to run COBOL, you need to also be able to duplicate the environment for a lot of this business process software to behave the same. The reason to "rewrite it" isn't really anything to do with developers not wanting to deal with COBOL syntax in 2025, it is about not wanting to maintain Mainframe environment you otherwise no longer need. If you are the electric company with your byzantine rules for billing by location, customer class, contract type, volume, peak-hours, service events,.... migrating your existing process to GNU COBOL onto some Linux cluster for Z/OS is probably no more and no less rework than migrating to Python/Ruby/Java/C# while you are at it.

How old is the product? It used to be much easier to make s3 buckets public.

I'll give them the benefit of the doubt nobody went out of their way to do something stupid, or did the old 'I don't understand this shut of fall the security'

What is rather inexcusable here is the most basic of security reviews, I am talking like a completely automated CIS Benmark check, point click go, should have picked up public permissions on a bucket.

That should have triggered:

Someone to say "WTF that is our image data pool, excuse me I have to call the CISO and CTO now." The CISO/CTO should have then said "holly-hell, lock that down now, warn customer services we might be about to trigger an outage, get the IR team started reviewing every access log, find the architects, tell the dev team to get themselves into the offices from wherever they are, and start planning a fix and rollout to access this securely!"

add to this the implication of all these costs calculations is that somehow the collective "we" is owed something as result.

Pretty much the entirety of population growth and economic success mid-century on of the US anywhere south of the Mason Dixon can be ascribed to cheap energy, a lot of that was Oil&Gas. Autos and air-conditioners changed everything.

The post war industrial boom was going to happen no matter what, realistically it would have been almost entirely coal fired without the Big Oil! What would the ecologic and economic cost of that have been? Did the study methodology allow them to deduct the difference?

I wish the for public consumption level research would more clearly clearly state if the concern is micro-plastics or nano-plastics, which EPA and some other treat as a subset of micro-plastic.

A micro plastic can be as a big as 5mm; that certainly inst getting into an artery (though normal means anyway) let alone anyone's brain. Even down to fractions like 10ths of a millimeter I'd be surprised if bio-accumulation is really a problem. However there are a lot of materials like synthetic fabrics that readily produce plastic fragments quite a lot smaller than that.

Common sense tells us that plastic in the body (medical implants aside) probably isn't good for us, how harmful it is we don't know. The cautionary principle suggests we should try limit that.

To do that we need a better handle on:
1) Identifying how small is to small for safety, when do plastics start to accumulate vs being stopped by our various mechanisms for preventing the ingress and effecting expulsion foreign objects.

2) what types of plastics in what kinds of applications lead to dangerously small plastic bits. Can we avoid these, while still enjoying other applications

3) how do we make it easier for consumers to spot when plastic is deteriorating and might be producing dangerously small particles at a higher rate.

4) how do we manage and incentivize safe plastic disposal.

That is a pretty weird take on what happened.

I would say in the "pre-internet, there would be no doubt that the California courts would have laughed someone out of the room if a third party sent them a letter asking them nicely to affix serial number to their person, which they did and then came to the court crying it was used to identify them."

And they are exactly right. Anyone doing anything on the internet will be either forced to geofence, or face the impossibility of compliance with a tangle of contradictory international laws possibly not even availible in language you speak.

The only people this *might* be good for are Internet mega-companies like Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, etc with armies of lawyers on the payroll and control of crticial infrastructure that makes even judges and regulators fear economic consequences associated with enforcement.

Sites should be regulated and subject to legal jurisdiction where the actual activity takes place. No US court should be ruling on what a Canadian webserver is allowed to send.

Nonsense, it is a Canadian company. It should be governed by Canadian rules, and subject to Canadian court except where the activities in question are substantively in an other jurisdiction.

Was the origin server that generated the set-cookie header in the US? If yes then I can see a case for US jurisdiction on the issue, but if it was in Canada, then complaint should be made in Canada.

National courts should not be in the business of regulation international internet sites. If Legislatures want to prohibit their own publics from interacting with foreign sites, they can do so. Individuals if they want specific legal protections that exist in their own country should stick to domestic sites or at least sites run by a domestic subsidiary.

That is just it, children play make believe. "Grown man has human moment with action figure" makes you think, what is wrong with that guy.

There does seem to be a larger segment of the adult population that wants to spend more and more time playing make believe today. I think there is question to be asked as to if more people are not 'growing up' than in the past and if that is true why?

It is hard not to look at a lot of the video games industry and these various AI girlfriend/boyfriend type applications and not think much of the focus is about trying to cloak that people are playing make believe with enough fancy HiFi tech and thus make these playthings socially acceptable, as it is to actually improve the experience.

Modern workplace culture sucks.

you look great, Tess.

That constitutes hitting on it(her)? what the hell?

It isn't like he said "you look great, want to get some dinner and some drinks after work?" yet he acts like it some big deal to make some banal flattering statements to coworker?

If Robert in sales walks in dressed to the nines for a client meeting, and I say "Looking sharp today Bob!" is that hitting on him?

and no, I don't think the situation changes if we make Robert a Roberta and Bob Bobbie. Honestly this dude seems to have no ability to have normal human interactions at all. He is probably afraid to talk to women in general, and I'd bet most of his male friends are like "Nice enough guy, decent to hang out with but kind of a dweeb."

and we had to walk up stairs both ways to the kitchenette

As low effort as having an LLM generate book, especially for electronic distribution would be. - I would be shocked if both things are not going on.

There is a entire cottage industry around using vanity press to print and sell out-of-copyright classics on Amazon. Some of them are pretty nice. I got a Leatherstocking Tales volume bound in leather on quality paper, but if you look up the publisher the address is a residence in FL.

These people grab some public domain art work and text decorations, hire out making a few hundred copies of some classic, mark it up some percentage, can't be much really, and ship retail them on Amazon, etc, shopify etc.

The poorly researched, even more poorly written, intentionally slated and inflammatory 'instant book' about political figures has been a fixture of second half 20th century campaigns. Often to just make a quick buck but also churned out by campaign surrogates to see if they can move the needles even a little, isn't new. AI just makes it even easier.

^THIS^

While there certainly are legitimate privacy concerns around third party cookies, Google's interest in the subject was hardly the public good.

The entire thing was about making it more difficult for their competitors to track ad impressions and user behavior with as much accuracy as Google via their other telemetry.

It was about Google being able to charge both higher rates for ad placement, and charge more for confirmed impressions and click troughs. This is slashdot though were people will write a wall of text on the importance of privacy, in Chrome..