No, it's not easy to side load apps, unless you're a nerd. Regular people have no idea how to do it. And if they do figure it out, they have to wade through multiple scary security warning popups, that are really no different than what you experience if you try to cancel your streaming service subscription. "Are you REALLY sure you want to do this? But wait! This could be harmful!" Yeah right, it could cost Google revenue, that's the real reason for the scary messages.

You mean, kind of like how you can install software on Windows and Linux from any old random website? Where's the rage about that?

Do you really buy Google's and Apple's marketing that says they lock down the app stores to protect users? Really? No, they lock them down for one reason only: greed.

I think this law seems like a *good* idea.

So, I agree that Congress is largely made up of idiots. But how does this law fit that narrative? This seems like a good thing to me, for a change.

I guess now they're not afraid it's going to bite someone.

5% unemployment used to be considered "full" employment. Now it's a cataclysm. Interesting how perspectives change.

While $2.7 is an actual price, a human editor would know that prices always include two decimal places.

Maybe it already is happening, and that's why so many CEOs are leaving their jobs!

Not even close to free. All these random AI tools are licensed at exorbitant rates by software vendors.

Don't worry, they'll have to hire more Americans to fix the problems created by automation.

Yeah in a couple of years, the headline will be "Hyundai rehires hundreds of humans to replace robot technology that failed to live up to the hype."

You go right ahead and build that browser, I wish you luck. In a year or two, you might be able to reach feature parity with lynx. But as you said, it would comply with the standards as much as possible. You and...no one?...will enjoy using your standards-observing software.

I'm guessing everyone is neurodivergent in some way.

For months now, slashdot notification emails have been failing DMARC tests, causing all the emails to go to spam. Pretty annoying!

"Open" in the context of OpenAI just means they are "open" to people using their system.

In the end, every product is really about what the product's users want out of it. If it does what users want, they will use it. If it doesn't, they won't, even if that "other thing" that they don't want, is being true to the HTML standard.

There is no virtue in being true to a standard that nobody wants. What you're describing is a desire for Firefox to be "purist" in its philosophy. But being "pure" has no relevance or importance to the people who are choosing what browser to use.

In my small hometown, there was still a law on the books that said you couldn't drive a car down main street. That law was never enforced because main street is critical for getting people to where they want to go, in that town. If we were to espouse "pure" adherence to the law, the town would have to put up roadblocks to keep cars out, or change the law.

Purism has no value.