No, not really correct. It was more like IA's arguement was based on multiple former cases being true rather than any one case being an exact match for what they did. For example they argued they can make digital copies of books and cited the Supreme Court case about video taping TV shows. The supreme court ruled copying TV shows was legal where as in this case the judge ruled copying books into a digital format was illegal.

The important thing to note here is this isn't even getting into the issue of the IA sharing books it digitized. That part was just about the act of copying them into a digital format in the first place.

It was honestly a surprising ruling because of how completely he ruled against the IA. The end result could have ultimately been the same even if he agreed with the IA on some points but he didn't which was a real surprise.

It's not that hard to argue it was legal. The IA had some pretty solid arguments backed by some fairly well known copyright lawyers. If you read the break down of the case and all the precedent the IA cited and the judge ignored to come to his ruling I think you'd be a bit surprised.

It's not really shocking that the IA lost but that the judge ruled so firmly against them and rejected almost every argument they made in full was a surprise. The appeal will be interesting as he certainly gave the AI plenty they can cite for why his ruling was incorrect.

I already know plenty of people who consider their laptop vents a hand warmer. They plug in a mouse and specifically use it right beside the vents.

I've even seen people complain when dirty laptops were cleaned which made the fans work better and thus their hand warmer less efficient since it was now blowing cooler air.

Laptop use varies quite a bit. Some people won't touch a desktop thinking of them as old tech but with work from home most people like to setup an extra monitor and sometimes a wireless keyboard and mouse. Essentially you have a lot of "laptop" users who may as well have a desktop because they have so much extra plugged in it's essentially stationary anyway.

As far as this product goes though I don't think it matters too much. No reason you couldn't just mount it over the laptop screen. The device is about 7" tall so you'd have to push it to about 14" but that should still be close enough to get plenty of heat.

They did but you could turn it off which most power users do. With Windows 11 so far they don't let you turn off grouping, it's mandatory.

Depends what you mean by understand. It's currently looking like they are stepping back and going to say it's not for them to decide. That's a form of understanding. Although it seems weird to me to write this headline since they haven't actually done that yet.

They're long term temp fixes. If you use Sharkbite correctly it should last a minimum of 25 years. I think they're great for first time DIYers. Lets you learn basic plumbing and build up some confidence then you can transition to something else once you understand their limits.

Although quite honestly if you really want you could use Sharkbite forever. Just check them over every decade and replace them if you see a problem. You could literally replace one every 5 years for the rest of your life and it would still be cheaper than calling a plumber out once.

TPM isn't even close to being supported by most devices.This isn't the 90's. 5 year old computers are very capable these days and tons of offices/homes have them. Back in the 90's your computer was old if it was 3, by 5 it was ancient that simply isn't the case anymore.

It's not really about paying for Windows, a Windows 7 key still works to install Windows 11. Even though the official upgrade processes ended years ago they never stopped accepting old keys.

The problem is actually hardware. There's basically no chance a computer running Windows 7 is supported by Windows 11. Most Windows 10 computers aren't even supported by Windows 11.

Your statement doesn't make any logical sense. Listing records you don't care about in no way makes them an illegitimate record holding company. The records they hold are all real and they try to validate them. That's really all anyone wants from a record holding company.

I'm not even sure what you're trying to say. I think it was "Guinness is bad for recognizing accomplishments from countries you don't like".

I'm really not trying to be mean to you but you're just repeating the same thing over and over with more words. Your point is fine I guess but it's just nitpicky. No sport between countries, no tech company, no multinational company in existence is good under your view. Which is an opinion you can have but if you want to take that hard-line stance what are you doing using a device capable of posting on Reddit? You're betraying your ethics.

I'm not saying Guinness is good. It's just as far as known brands go they aren't even in the top thousand to pick on. Having a Guinness record means pretty much jack shit globally. Best use case is as a pickup line. You're assigning vastly too much responsibility to Guinness.

So? Do you have an example of where that's a problem? If the award was first person to get a Guinness record at Microsoft that would be a single time award as nobody else could ever be first but who cares? If someone wants to pay to have that let them.

I agree with most of your comment. Your last sentence is wrong though, anyone else could buy that record if they could beat it and Guinness would let them.

What is in stark contrast with how they portray themselves? Nothing you said goes against Guinness branding.

Honestly you seem really mad about Guinness not being a crusader for world peace. They don't claim to be, nobody expects them to be and they aren't. You can be as high and mighty as you want about human right abuses but bear in mind you're typing that complaint on a device which was made at least in part by a company that committed human right abuses so you're also complicit.

Most people (and companies) accept money from people who pay them for a service. Very few actually care how the person/company got the money originally. You can complain about it all you like but you're so far down the chain that it doesn't matter. Literally everyone does it.

Like I said, I don't see a problem. Who cares if they recognize an obscure category? If you want to pay them to recognize you are the best at riding a tricycle on top of a moving bus while eating a hotdog and singing opera then so be it. I see absolutely no problem with that. You get your record, Guinness gets their money and absolutely nobody was hurt.

As for the human rights issue. I've not heard anything about it in regards to Guinness but I could believe it. What organization doesn't accept money from people who violate human rights? I don't think there's a single organization that records records that doesn't.

I don't see greed here. They are what they say they are. It's a business, they have ethics and they stick to them. Paying to have a record entered isn't corruption, it's a business.

Doing Guiness in the way people think they want is impossible. It's also not how any records work. Even world records for sports only count if done according to the rules of a major sports body which also costs money. Very few records can we actually say for certain are truly the record, just the best we ever recorded.

I wouldn't call them corrupt. Sure they take money to publish your records but they don't lie. The records they have are to their knowledge actually the best. They won't publish you as the best at something if they have other records showing someone is better.

I think you're just putting too much into Guinness. It started as a way to settle bar bets by actually recording records. It's not some fine tuned research organization that does extensive research. They just record the best they see and charge you for it.

You're still allowed to make a new standard. The law has allowances for new standards it just has to be agreed to.

It's honestly not a concern. This law was only needed because Apple chose to be dicks. The EU told every manufacturer more than a decade ago to sort out their standards or they will. Literally every single company but Apple got together and went to USB. Apple was the lone holdout that adamantly refused so now we have a law because one company refused to work with others.

CD's can last for decades or even centuries if kept in good condition. I still have actual floppy disks from the 80's and 90's that read just fine and they deteriorate much faster.

I agree with you on most things but ultimately it's a cost issue. If they get the cost low enough it becomes viable. Obviously it's only really going to be a good choice if you've already depleted all the area you had for normal solar panels.

It's not going to be as useful as a lot of people here think but I could see it becoming useful on skyscrapers. If buildings are built with these in mind, the setup costs go down drastically.

Ultimately it's not very useful yet but we do build buildings with tons of windows and very little roof space so I wouldn't abandon the technology.

The law also has rules on using standard wireless charging methods. So they can't escape this law as either they follow the rules for wired or wireless, they simply can't do their own thing anymore.