DeepSeek first and foremost is a business. Yes, being a business in China means risk of being ordered tomorrow to do something that is not in your best interests. But now we know the US is not immune to that level of government oversight either.
The difference is DeepSeek and other Chinese models are open weights.
That reinterpretation would have make Apple a monopoly and thus other anti-trust laws would apply, which did not happen. As I said: they are introducing new category, the gatekeepers, for the sole purpose of making the law applicable.
They do adhere to the law perfectly by not providing a law breaking feature. If you don't like the way the law allows that, you should address your complaints to the lawmaker.
Sorry, my mistake. DMA. However, it runs counter to the definition of antitrust law, that is the law that applies to the trust or a monopoly, an entity that controls the market. DMA instead applies to the companies of certain size, regardless whether they have market control or not.
You mean DMCA. It is not an antitrust framework. Europe has pretty robust anti-trust framework. DMCA is an attempt to regulate companies that cannot be legally considered monopolies, and that do not run afoul of any pre-existing EU regulation.
Just for that case a new category of business classification was invented: the gatekeepers, and coincidentally almost all of those gatekeepers are American companies. Unlike antitrust regulation and other EU regulation that wan't based on clearly observed harm to the consumers, as otherwise that would have been covered by existing laws. It was solely designed to prevent businesses to have a potential ability to do something anti-consumer.
You should remember that according to a court testimony the whole European area (which goes beyond EU) gives Apple 7% of their revenue, whereas breaking DMCA may incur penalties of ups to 10% of global turnover.
Those numbers make withholding "risky" products a no-brainer strategy. Also, those numbers put a hard limit of how much Apple will want reevaluate their general strategy of tightly integrated first-party software.
I don't think people buy Macs for ideology. They buy cause they like it. Framework, on the other hand, is more ideological proposition than practical. Which is fine, because whatever your choice is it should make you feel comfortable.
If I understand correctly, Go language praised in the article still has red and blue functions, only now they the colours are handled implicitly, and you as a programmer reading the code will have harder time guessing which is which on the call site.
It is a downer, but I would like to test the performance first in the practical scenario. I've been working on a project where tagged unions would literally saved us from complexity. If that to happen again later I would go for boxed implementation and swallow up the penalty.
It is pedantic, and you have to be pedantic when talking about laws and regulations. The vaguely written laws have the tendency to be interpreted in the most restrictive way possible by the executive branch.
> "Algorithm" is obviously shorthand for: a recommendations system that shows me things I didn't explicitly opt into.
In that interpretation that is applicable to any form of broadcast, including TV and radio, driven by the user ratings of their previous programs.
One of the most convenient aspects of Air Drop for me is that it selects the fastest available connection between the devices and ability to work without both devices being on the same network.