> When interpreting EU law, the CJEU pays particular attention to the aim and purpose of EU law (teleological interpretation), rather than focusing exclusively on the wording of the provisions (linguistic interpretation).
I'm not disagreeing with your overall point, but autistic in that comment is attempting to capture that "literal rhetoric but socially unaware" style of argument people can have when they argue a point too black and white.
"Retarded" does not imply this
I would say the problem with the comment is more in line with how OCD or adhd is used, improperly. Like despite autism being a spectrum with traits that can't be reduced to that one stereotype.
It's being used to invoke a stereotype of neurodivergence. Not as a stand in for general stupidity.
It's being used as a stand in for a very specific example of stupidity, and it is "clever" because it evokes strong imagery in an unexpected way. Which is why it is funny. But still offensive. It's best to avoid black and white thinking about things like this, as hard as it is for the ego to admit that it takes pleasure from cruelty.
Most of our insults against intelligence come from medical terminology originally. Every word eventually starts being used offensively, and then a new one gets coined and the cycle continues.
I assume you're being sarcastic, but moron, retard, stupid, dumb, idiot, mad, imbecile, mongoloid, spastic, lame, lunatic, maniac and psycho were all used as medical terms before they became stigmatic. Filter out sexual and scatological insults and there is very little left.
It's kind of funny and also kind of insulting. I'd laugh if a friend said it but said seriously by some rando on the Internet, nah, find a better way to put it.
You may not care, but a lot of people I know care what brand chat bot they use personally,. usually it's tied to trust and reputation more than anything else. People are fickle.
Whos paying the telcos for those 5G connections and also has the FCC been degraded so much that they would allow for undeclared radios in consumer products?
But in your scenario they are an integral and necessary part of the device, so it's costed in.
In a television it's an added cost and it's unclear if serving ads really can offset that extra $25-100 of hardware (and included data) you ship on a $200-1000 television.
It's also unclear to me if the low data packages they come with would be enough to serve meaningful ads to begin with. Those devices usually come with a fixed plan of 100MB/month for 5yrs (or along those lines). Modern smart tv ads are very often video or at least hi res images.
> In a television it's an added cost and it's unclear if serving ads really can offset that extra $25-100 of hardware (and included data) you ship on a $200-1000 television.
Amazon seems to have done the math and found that it makes sense to give a $20 discount on a $180 device if it lets them display very unobtrusive ads on the lockscreen. So I don't think you are correct.
Why are you assuming the primary motivator is to serve ads? Smart TVs were already caught running content ID against the contents of the screen and phoning that data home. "Routing at the edge" is the euphemism for the logical extension of that.
> extra $25-100
Your estimated costs are off by at least one order of magnitude, probably two.
Of course none of this makes much sense in a world where smart TVs have ubiquitous wifi, most consumers have one, most consumers run the stock OS, and most consumers connect it to the public internet. It would be entirely viable if not for that status quo.
Unfortunately, it's used to spy on you, and insurance companies are known to buy the data to profile customers or prospective customers. The good thing about Fords is that the cell modem often has its own fuse.
Secret 5G is not as common because there is a huge incentive to resell the free service. Maybe with eSIM it will be harder. Kindles uses to have a free data plan SIM.
Not all mobile data APNs go to the Internet. You can't resell an IP service that lands on an RFC1918 network with exactly one IP:port available; the API endpoint.
Not saying I've seen this in devices, but I have built and run mobile data networks with private APNs.
No. I did see in the 5G design that that type of thing was a consideration. It may well be that phone companies aren't selling like that, however it certainly would make sense that they would be looking for companies who want a deal. Most of the cost of service is fixed, and a large number of customers want service during particular peak times and so they can serve that peak data even at off peak times such as when everyone's asleep and so if they could sell that time only that is a little bit more money. It only makes sense if those buying off peak times do have other alternatives that they would turn to instead.
The FCC is literally powerless nowadays for all intents and purposes. They've abrogated so much of their authority to the states now that they might as well be eliminated. What little authority that remains with it is bought and paid for to the point that I'm sure you could get anything "approved" if you wanted.
> has the FCC been degraded so much that they would allow for undeclared radios in consumer products?
Well... most TVs already have a WiFi/BT chipset for stuff like advertisements or, especially with Apple, high-bandwidth video streaming. There is already a radio module present, but (IIRC) you don't have to disclose what exactly that module is capable of.
reply