This title should be changed as no court found this is illegal, and this is pretty standard, if extensive, browser fingerprinting, however disagreeable it is

I agree.

I'm not convinced by their page explaining "Why it's illegal and potentially criminal" [0]. It's written by security researchers and non-attorneys.

For example, this characterization seems overly broad:

> The Court of Justice of the European Union has ruled, in three separate cases, that data which allows someone to infer or deduce protected characteristics is covered by this prohibition, regardless of whether the company intended to collect sensitive data.

[0] https://browsergate.eu/why-its-illegal/

Gmaps api is pricy, hopefully this doesn’t go super viral or the dev will have a big bill to pay

Quite a lot probably. I wasn’t able to use the health app on two different iPhones - it would crash after tapping “get started” consistently - and apple told me to just start from scratch instead of restoring from backup and there was no other way to fix it. Not a very satisfying answer

Do you have any content blocker extensions?

Technically, this is title editorializing, since WH denied using AI… but they are probably lying.

And when you're lying on that scale, automating it with AI is likely an actual productivity gain.

It doesn't work with yandex.kz. Someone call Kazakhstan.

> No registry RDAP server was identified for this domain. Attempting lookup using WHOIS service.

> Failed to perform lookup using WHOIS service: TLD_NOT_SUPPORTED.

Likely cached tiles either on your end or Google's servers

(2021)

The people who think AI will replace good journalism are the same people who think "X" is revolutionizing citizen journalism

AI may not replace good journalism but it will flood the world with garbage so that it makes good journalism harder to spot for the average individual.

2 live crew is a W