It’s not just vague privacy principles keeping this app out of the EU. The Digital Markets Act would prevent Meta from requiring an Instagram account for Threads and wouldn’t let Meta share data between Threads and Instagram (e.g. to let advertisers target you on Threads based on what you liked on Instagram).

It actually does. Read the text of the law. Reproducing ANY PORTION of the news content, including the title of the article or lead sentence (which is what Facebook currently shows) requires paying the publisher. Similarly, just allowing users to post a link which “facilitates access to the content” on the publisher’s…

Sure. But the ads aren’t associated with specific content, they are distributed all over Facebook/Instagram, so how can you say that a news publisher is entitled to $/per post, but the person who created a hilarious cat video doesn’t get a single pence.

Stop posting that this only applies when Facebook posts the content of the article. Literally anything from the title of the article, first line of text, or link to the publisher’s website requires Facebook pay the publisher:

Good news....Crazy Larry can still post news on Facebook because he’s not a registered news publisher, but you can’t counter his conspiracy theory nonsense with credible news sources because of this law/Facebook’s response. This is a disaster from a misinformation standpoint.

You’re describing a thumbnail...it posts a photo and the first few lines of text so a person can determine if they want to click on the link. Otherwise you get nothing but “Shocking Titan Submarine Discovery....” headlines that link to Cialis ads and conspiracy blogs.

This law makes Facebook pay everytime a user posts a link to a news source. Those sites benefit when other users click on the link and are directed to the news publisher’s site (either through digital ads on their own site or pay wall/subscriptions).

No. This is literally about users posting links to news stories. If a Canadian user posts a link to an article from a Canadian “news publisher” (registration required), Facebook has to pay the publisher a negotiated per-post fee.

An academic colleague of mine was supporting this law (and the UK/Australian laws its based on) as being about Publishers getting a “fair share” of revenue from Facebook. The flaw in that argument is that (1) Facebook makes money on ads, not content that people share, and (2) Facebook doesn’t choose which content to…

It’s only going to apply to professional news sources. So your crazy uncle can post those insane conspiracy theories, but you can’t post a properly sourced and verified Washington Post or NYT article rebutting him.

All the people posting the same “Oh noes....news on FB bad” hot take completely miss the point.

“You keep saying that word....I do not think it means what you think it means.”

Literally every shareholder. Every shareholder benefited pro rata based on how many shares they have. About 70 cents per share. For context, the stock price dropped 58 cents today just because that’s how stocks work.

It’s reprehensible that these crimes were committed by these drivers and that Lyft has refused to take accountability for their role it these crimes (hiding behind “independent contractor” claims), but....this article is so uninformed and misleading that I don’t know where to start.

I too am thrilled to read Raph’s latest work in Horse & Hound.

<wipes joyful tears from eyes>

Wait...David Tracy is a *former* Jalopnik too?!

3D printing, as an additive technology, doesn’t require removing excess material like CNC milling would. It also allows more diverse shapes (complex latices, etc) than traditional injection molding would, which can be used to product lighter weight parts with less material consumed.

I get some options being packaged together, like HUD with better infotainment upgrade, when they’re all technologically connected. But arbitrary bundling of unrelated mechanical upgrades is infuriating.

So much of what is wrong with the U.S. auto industry can be traced to the entrenched dealership model. Sleazy purchasing experience, exorbitant repair and parts costs, limited inventory options, etc.