No, because they can afford the legal fees. It will be worst for smaller sites. From the article:

With Section 230, if a website (or a user!) wants to defend its right to keep content up (or take it down), winning such a case typically costs around $100,000. Without those protections, even if you’d ultimately win on First Amendment grounds, you’re looking at about $2 million in legal fees. For Meta or Google, that’s a rounding error. For a small news site or blog, it’s potentially fatal. And this includes users who simply forward an email or retweet something they saw. Section 230 protects them as well, but without it, they’re at the whims of legal threats.

RSS works too. Just add .rss to the end of the old.reddit URL for the sub, e.g. old.reddit.com/subreddit1.rss

And somehow they’ve spun that as terrorism.

I guess that explains why the iOS Mail app asked me to sign into my Outlook.com account again. I switched away from the Outlook app last week and I was thinking the Mail app must only be able to stay logged in for a few days at a time.

The OECD has been working on an agreement that will probably include standards, but Canada and other countries got tired of waiting.

These taxes usually have minimum revenue requirements that smaller players wouldn’t meet. Canada’s DST requires at least $20m in Canadian digital services revenue and €750m in global revenue.

Microsoft killed Wordpad

deleted by creator

They rewrote the taskbar and Start menu for Windows 11, and left out stuff like being able to move the taskbar or even have separate taskbar items for each instance of an application. Rewriting the whole OS would be a disaster.

The law doesn’t matter. With Musk’s position in the government this will basically end up as extortion: Settle or I’ll make things difficult for you.

AMD apparently has the 7900 XTX outperforming the 4090 in Deepseek.

TikTok may trust Trump but Apple and Google are much better off acting like the law is in force and could be used against them.

Also, I realize the goal of the Texas law is to label anything GLBT+ as “porn.”

They may not even need to go that far. The age verification laws going around these days tend to require it for content “harmful to minors”, not just porn, and everybody knows Republicans think “anything GLBT+” is harmful to minors.

Youtube and Instagram tried for years to lure in Tiktok users, and they failed so badly that even with Tiktok potentially getting banned, people would rather switch to a different potentially sketchy Chinese app.

What should we call blatant pandering to Trump and his ilk? MAGA signaling?

Meta says it was a mistake

Gizmodo’s post on this has the most honest title: A Lot of People Are Searching for How to Delete Facebook and Instagram, and We Would Like Their Clicks

The player that got the link back to Youtube removed allows publishers to sell their own ads. Seems like Youtube is worried about the content of ads it doesn’t control and wants to limit its association with them, so if, say, someone sees a porn ad, they blame the site the player is on, not Youtube.

I think the Verge messed up: the announcement said there would be a full-text RSS feed for subscribers, but they’ve actually added full article text to the existing feed, where normally I’d only get 2 or 3 paragraphs.

Their sister site Vox made a similar mistake; their RSS feed already had full text, but once they added the paywall I got the full text of articles that were paywalled if I tried to click through to the site. It’s like Vox Media doesn’t fully understand how its RSS feeds work.

The deportations will be scheduled, and they may be canceled if and only if the appropriate bribes are paid.