Meta didn't secretly hack into Flo and start collecting data or acquire this through some kind of tracking tags. Flo sent it to them intentionally. Regardless it strains credulity to think the California legislators in 1967 intended to write a law that applies to this situation when the internet wasn't even commercialized until 1995 and lawyers didn't give this theory a shot for another 30 years.

This is just a cash grab from lawyers trying to leverage a 1967 law meant to prevent eavesdropping on conversations. https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.americanbar.org%2Fgr...

The three-part test in the jury ruling specifically refers to "conversations" being overheard and/or recorded using an electronic device. How is Meta "eavesdropping" on conversations? Flo used Meta's tools to voluntarily send Meta data. They knew what these tools did and how the data was used. The FTC investigated Flo for their practices, not Meta. As per the FTC article:

"In its complaint, the FTC alleges that Flo promised to keep users’ health data private and only use it to provide the app’s services to users. In fact, according to the complaint, Flo disclosed health data from millions of users of its Flo Period & Ovulation Tracker app to third parties that provided marketing and analytics services to the app, including Facebook’s analytics division, Google’s analytics division, Google’s Fabric service, AppsFlyer, and Flurry.

According to the complaint, Flo disclosed sensitive health information, such as the fact of a user’s pregnancy, to third parties in the form of “app events,” which is app data transferred to third parties for various reasons. In addition, Flo did not limit how third parties could use this health data.

Flo did not stop disclosing this sensitive data until its practices were revealed in a news article in February 2019, which prompted hundreds of complaints from the app’s users.

The FTC also alleges that Flo violated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield frameworks, which, among other things, require notice, choice, and protection of personal data transferred to third parties."

No, they much prefer electronic filing, and there are multiple free commercial services that the IRS web site directs you to.

300,0000? So what. Ten million people filed Federal returns for free using TurboTax in 2024, and TurboTax does the state return for free too. The other free services were used by millions more. Given all the comprehensive free options available it made no sense to spend millions to develop DirectFile, or to spend many millions more to enhance and support it

DirectFile was nowhere near as good as the services you listed so it is unclear why removing it is bad

DirectFile was a nice effort but it wasn't as capable as the multiple free federal and state tax filing services available out there. It cost millions of dollars to create and would have cost millions more to support and enhance. It really didn't make sense.

Me too! I'm trans-age and age-fluid.

I did act. I adjusted my swimming pool heater down a degree F.

Sunny and seasonably hot for mid-July, 88 degrees with a light breeze today. Same as it has been this time of year every year for decades.

And "The Guardian" is a rag that has been publishing crap for decades.

The court knows it has no authority to do anything here. It's just virtue signaling and wishful thinking. The article ends with:

But the question remains whether the ICJ opinion will be respected. "[The ICJ] is an institution that is subject to geopolitics – and it relies on states adhering to its judgements, it doesn't have a police force," said Harj Narulla, a climate barrister at Doughty Street Chambers, which also represented the Solomon Islands.

When asked about the decision, a White House spokesperson told BBC News: "As always, President Trump and the entire Administration is committed to putting America first and prioritising the interests of everyday Americans."

And it sounds to me like Mary Schiavo's position is based on a 1 happening

Calling it "denazification" makes no sense. The Russians are fiercely anti-Nazi. In fact one of their justifications for invading Ukraine was "denazification". Here, from NBC news: https://ancillary-proxy.atarimworker.io?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.nbcnews.com%2Fthink%2F... "Ukraine's Nazi problem is real, even if Putin's 'denazification' claim isn't"

Great, so for your use case it works well. Accept the possibility it doesn't work well for other use cases.

It's scary that technologists don't realize there are other regulated businesses in the US, UK, an EU that all require age verification and somehow they all manage to comply.

This is Slashdot, where many technologists insist that technical problems can not be solved with technology, even if the technology already exists.