theverge--2020-10-05--This climate activist says he was silenced on Twitter

A Ugandan environmental activist was suspended from Twitter in the midst of a high-profile campaign — a suspension he believes is connected to his opponents in the country ’ s government and industries linked to deforestation .
Twitter won ’ t say what caused the account to be frozen , but environmental groups worry it ’ s part of a broader trend of powerful stakeholders exploiting Twitter ’ s moderation system to silence climate activists .
The suspension happened on the night of September 12th , after 22-year-old Nyombi Morris had just finished a television appearance about the preservation of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the interview , he woke up to find his account was frozen without explanation .
He says he contacted Twitter ’ s Help Center at least five times during the weeks his account was suspended but couldn ’ t figure out what had triggered the freeze , and began to suspect the suspension could be connected to his advocacy .
Another Ugandan activist with Fridays for Future who fights deforestation , Leah Namugerwa , had her account frozen in September , too .
“ I was very , very disappointed , ” Morris @ @ @ @ @ @ @ suspected is that because our government was trying to silence us about this Bugoma Forest , they used some people to suspend our accounts.
” Morris regained access to his original account on September 30th , after The Verge contacted Twitter regarding the suspensions .
Neither Morris nor The Verge was told why the account was suspended in the first place .
Twitter says that at least two of the suspended accounts belonging to environmental activists were caught in a spam filter and have since been reinstated .
The social media giant didn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ why those accounts might have been flagged as spam , what happened to other accounts , or how many in all have been suspended .
The suspension has drawn concern from around the world .
Fridays for Future , the global movement that started with teen activist Greta Thunberg ’ s climate strikes in Sweden , posted a tweet on September 28th to call attention to numerous accounts suspended around the world this year .
“ This is unacceptable .
Having a platform to talk about the climate crisis is crucial , especially @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by climate change ] , ” the group said .
Morris says the account freeze isolated him from other activists and stifled his ability to speak out .
“ We are not supported by our media .
It is only social media which can support us , but if even on social media we are silenced — where will we go ?
” says Morris .
Deforestation has taken place at an alarming rate in Uganda , where 63 percent of forests have been logged in the past 25 years alone , according @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Authority ( NFA ) .
The contested Bugoma Forest is home to nine mammal species on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species , including about 600 endangered chimpanzees .
Protecting the forest is also important for people , conservationists say , because locals depend on its resources , and it functions as an important carbon sink that soaks up and stores planet-heating carbon dioxide .
Parts of Bugoma Forest were leased to the sugar manufacturer Hoima Sugar by the Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom in Uganda in 2016 .
( @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to British colonization , whose rulers are recognized by the country today even though they ’ re not given sovereign power . )
The National Forestry Authority , which manages Bugoma , took the Bunyoro-Kitara king and Hoima Sugar to court , claiming that the company didn ’ t have the legal right to clear the forest to make way for sugar plantations .
The Uganda High Court ruled against the NFA in a decision last year , and the National Environment Management Authority approved the use of land for sugar plantations this @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and work is undeniable It ’ s still unclear what triggered Morris ’ suspension , and there ’ s no hard evidence linking it to his political opponents — but its impact on his life and work is undeniable .
He previously relied on Twitter more than any other social media platform because of its reach .
He ’ d met activists around the world through Twitter , and he felt that he had the ear of influential people .
Greta Thunberg followed him , he proudly mentioned .
Twitter is also where @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and issues in other parts of the world , he says .
With his account down , he began tweeting from another account for an advocacy group that he started .
But it has far fewer followers , and Morris lost touch with some of his friends who didn ’ t know about his new account .
It was as if his social media presence had been reduced to a whisper .
He could see everyone talking , but he wasn ’ t being heard in the same way .
“ I ’ @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ m there [ on Twitter ] to learn , but I can not teach .
That ’ s the biggest challenge , ” Morris told The Verge while his account was still frozen .
The experience went against everything that brought him to Twitter in the first place .
“ Social media doesn ’ t separate the rich and the poor , they allow everyone — that ’ s why I like it so much , ” he says .
Social media has been an even bigger lifeline for environmental activists during @ @ @ @ @ @ @ s paired with political turbulence .
Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni , who has been in power since 1986 , is up for election next year .
The pandemic curbed campaign rallies and protests since mass gatherings still aren ’ t allowed in the country , which has had some of the strictest measures in place in Africa to curb the spread of COVID-19 .
That ’ s led to people becoming more outspoken online , and the government subsequently attempting to crack down more on blogs and social media .
Uganda has imposed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ since 2018 , which has been criticized as an attack on free speech .
When the pandemic first began to unfold , demonstrators , including Thunberg , moved their actions online and urged their followers to follow public health guidelines on social distancing .
Some environmental activists returned to the streets on September 25th for a Global Climate Strike .
In Uganda , protesters were arrested for joining the strike — including Fridays for Future leader Leah Namugerwa .
“ Being a climate activist , it is becoming a crime .
They are @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to the streets , ” Morris says .
That ’ s why he and others opted to post photos and videos of themselves with protest signs from their homes rather than hit the streets that day .
Those who were arrested were eventually released , in part because others made a ruckus about it on social media , Morris believes .
Twitter suspensions have an outsized impact on activists working in places where it ’ s more dangerous to oppose industry and the government .
Defending the environment where you live is a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ world : 212 environmental activists were killed in 2019 , the highest ever recorded by watchdog group Global Witness .
One of those killed this year was Randy Echanis , a longtime advocate for the environment , workers , and peasants , in the Philippines who was found stabbed to death in his apartment in August .
Soon after , activists in the Philippines appealed to Twitter to reinstate the account of the left-wing political party , Anakpawis , that Echanis chaired .
They said the account was suspended after the burial march @ @ @ @ @ @ @ back online .
The month before Echanis was killed , Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte signed an Anti-Terrorism Act into law that human rights watchdogs say criminalizes people for simply criticizing his government , which has overseen the extrajudicial killings of thousands of Filipinos .
The Philippines consistently ranks among the top three countries where land and environmental defenders are killed , according to Global Witness .
Twitter isn ’ t the only social media giant environmental activists have called out for stifling them .
Facebook faced scrutiny last month after it suspended the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to an event protesting the construction of the contested Coastal GasLink pipeline in Canada .
“ Facebook can silence much of the climate movement at their discretion , without explanation for any duration , ” Lindsey Allen , chief program officer at Greenpeace USA , told The Verge in September .
“ That ’ s unnerving.
” Morris says he ’ s happy that he ’ s back on Twitter .
Namugerwa ’ s account was restored shortly after Fridays for Future tweeted about the suspensions on September 28th .
“ I couldn @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that I lost everything , ” Morris says .
He wants to raise awareness for other environmental activists frozen out of their accounts , which is especially important for those from places with less political clout that nonetheless bear the brunt of harms from climate change .
What they ’ ll lose is up to the whims of the platform .

A Ugandan environmental activist was suspended from Twitter in the midst of a high-profile campaign — a suspension he believes is connected to his opponents in the country’s government and industries linked to deforestation. Twitter won’t say what caused the account to be frozen, but environmental groups worry it’s part of a broader trend of powerful stakeholders exploiting Twitter’s moderation system to silence climate activists.
The suspension happened on the night of September 12th, after 22-year-old Nyombi Morris had just finished a television appearance about the preservation of the Bugoma Forest. The morning after the interview, he woke up to find his account was frozen without explanation. He says he contacted Twitter’s Help Center at least five times during the weeks his account was suspended but couldn’t figure out what had triggered the freeze, and began to suspect the suspension could be connected to his advocacy. Another Ugandan activist with Fridays for Future who fights deforestation, Leah Namugerwa, had her account frozen in September, too.
Activists were caught in a spam filter
“I was very, very disappointed,” Morris told The Verge. “What I suspected is that because our government was trying to silence us about this Bugoma Forest, they used some people to suspend our accounts.” Morris regained access to his original account on September 30th, after The Verge contacted Twitter regarding the suspensions. Neither Morris nor The Verge was told why the account was suspended in the first place.
Twitter says that at least two of the suspended accounts belonging to environmental activists were caught in a spam filter and have since been reinstated. The social media giant didn’t give any more information on why those accounts might have been flagged as spam, what happened to other accounts, or how many in all have been suspended.
The suspension has drawn concern from around the world. Fridays for Future, the global movement that started with teen activist Greta Thunberg’s climate strikes in Sweden, posted a tweet on September 28th to call attention to numerous accounts suspended around the world this year. “This is unacceptable. Having a platform to talk about the climate crisis is crucial, especially for [people and areas most affected by climate change],” the group said.
Morris says the account freeze isolated him from other activists and stifled his ability to speak out. “We are not supported by our media. It is only social media which can support us, but if even on social media we are silenced — where will we go?” says Morris.
Deforestation has taken place at an alarming rate in Uganda, where 63 percent of forests have been logged in the past 25 years alone, according to the country’s National Forestry Authority (NFA). The contested Bugoma Forest is home to nine mammal species on the International Union for Conservation of Nature Red List of Threatened Species, including about 600 endangered chimpanzees. Protecting the forest is also important for people, conservationists say, because locals depend on its resources, and it functions as an important carbon sink that soaks up and stores planet-heating carbon dioxide.
Parts of Bugoma Forest were leased to the sugar manufacturer Hoima Sugar by the Bunyoro-Kitara Kingdom in Uganda in 2016. (Uganda was made up of kingdoms prior to British colonization, whose rulers are recognized by the country today even though they’re not given sovereign power.) The National Forestry Authority, which manages Bugoma, took the Bunyoro-Kitara king and Hoima Sugar to court, claiming that the company didn’t have the legal right to clear the forest to make way for sugar plantations. The Uganda High Court ruled against the NFA in a decision last year, and the National Environment Management Authority approved the use of land for sugar plantations this year.
Its impact on his life and work is undeniable
It’s still unclear what triggered Morris’ suspension, and there’s no hard evidence linking it to his political opponents — but its impact on his life and work is undeniable. He previously relied on Twitter more than any other social media platform because of its reach. He’d met activists around the world through Twitter, and he felt that he had the ear of influential people. Greta Thunberg followed him, he proudly mentioned. Twitter is also where he could learn more about the environment and issues in other parts of the world, he says.
With his account down, he began tweeting from another account for an advocacy group that he started. But it has far fewer followers, and Morris lost touch with some of his friends who didn’t know about his new account. It was as if his social media presence had been reduced to a whisper. He could see everyone talking, but he wasn’t being heard in the same way.
“I’m no longer teaching. Now I’m there [on Twitter] to learn, but I cannot teach. That’s the biggest challenge,” Morris told The Verge while his account was still frozen.
The experience went against everything that brought him to Twitter in the first place. “Social media doesn’t separate the rich and the poor, they allow everyone — that’s why I like it so much,” he says.
Social media has been an even bigger lifeline for environmental activists during coronavirus-induced lockdowns, especially when it’s paired with political turbulence. Ugandan President Yoweri Museveni, who has been in power since 1986, is up for election next year. The pandemic curbed campaign rallies and protests since mass gatherings still aren’t allowed in the country, which has had some of the strictest measures in place in Africa to curb the spread of COVID-19. That’s led to people becoming more outspoken online, and the government subsequently attempting to crack down more on blogs and social media. Uganda has imposed a tax on using social media sites since 2018, which has been criticized as an attack on free speech.
When the pandemic first began to unfold, demonstrators, including Thunberg, moved their actions online and urged their followers to follow public health guidelines on social distancing. Some environmental activists returned to the streets on September 25th for a Global Climate Strike.
In Uganda, protesters were arrested for joining the strike — including Fridays for Future leader Leah Namugerwa. “Being a climate activist, it is becoming a crime. They are ready to arrest us if we go to the streets,” Morris says. That’s why he and others opted to post photos and videos of themselves with protest signs from their homes rather than hit the streets that day. Those who were arrested were eventually released, in part because others made a ruckus about it on social media, Morris believes.
Twitter suspensions have an outsized impact on activists working in places where it’s more dangerous to oppose industry and the government. Defending the environment where you live is a deadly business in many places around the world: 212 environmental activists were killed in 2019, the highest ever recorded by watchdog group Global Witness.
One of those killed this year was Randy Echanis, a longtime advocate for the environment, workers, and peasants, in the Philippines who was found stabbed to death in his apartment in August. Soon after, activists in the Philippines appealed to Twitter to reinstate the account of the left-wing political party, Anakpawis, that Echanis chaired. They said the account was suspended after the burial march for Echanis; it’s now back online. The month before Echanis was killed, Philippine President Rodrigo Duterte signed an Anti-Terrorism Act into law that human rights watchdogs say criminalizes people for simply criticizing his government, which has overseen the extrajudicial killings of thousands of Filipinos. The Philippines consistently ranks among the top three countries where land and environmental defenders are killed, according to Global Witness.
Twitter isn’t the only social media giant environmental activists have called out for stifling them. Facebook faced scrutiny last month after it suspended the accounts of more than 200 people connected to an event protesting the construction of the contested Coastal GasLink pipeline in Canada. “Facebook can silence much of the climate movement at their discretion, without explanation for any duration,” Lindsey Allen, chief program officer at Greenpeace USA, told The Verge in September. “That’s unnerving.”


theverge--2020-10-05--Avast! Boss Audio’s new weatherproof touchscreen brings CarPlay and Android Auto to boats

Apple ’ s CarPlay and Google ’ s Android Auto are meant for , well , cars and automobiles , but despite the emphasis on landlubber locomotion , there ’ s technically no reason that one couldn ’ t use them for navigating the high seas .
And that ’ s just what Boss Audio ’ s new aftermarket MRCP9685A head unit promises : a weatherproof module that offers the ability to use CarPlay and Android Auto not just in regular cars , but in off-road vehicles like Jeeps and even boats .
Installing an aftermarket head unit into a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , but getting a weatherproof one that supports both CarPlay or Android Auto and the rigors of the seafaring life is more difficult .
At least one enterprising Reddit user has already tried to jury-rig a similar implementation by installing a standard car unit , noting that CarPlay worked “ perfectly , ” but that they still had some work to do to make everything water-resistant .
But the MRCP9685A neatly dodges that issue : it ’ s designed with “ marine-grade ” weatherproofing , meaning you ’ ll be able to install @ @ @ @ @ @ @ standard double DIN head unit .
In addition to support for CarPlay and Android Auto ( over a standard USB cable , just like a car ) , the MRCP9685A also features support for Bluetooth audio , rear camera inputs for cars , and an integrated radio tuner .
Of course , being an aftermarket head unit , you ’ ll still need to install the MRCP9685A yourself ( or hire a professional to do it for you ) .
But if you ’ ve been dying for a way to use Android @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , Boss Audio ’ s new setup seems like it could be the answer .
The MRCP9685A is available from Boss Audio ’ s website for $ 289.99 .

Apple’s CarPlay and Google’s Android Auto are meant for, well, cars and automobiles, but despite the emphasis on landlubber locomotion, there’s technically no reason that one couldn’t use them for navigating the high seas. And that’s just what Boss Audio’s new aftermarket MRCP9685A head unit promises: a weatherproof module that offers the ability to use CarPlay and Android Auto not just in regular cars, but in off-road vehicles like Jeeps and even boats.
Installing an aftermarket head unit into a boat isn’t a new concept, but getting a weatherproof one that supports both CarPlay or Android Auto and the rigors of the seafaring life is more difficult. At least one enterprising Reddit user has already tried to jury-rig a similar implementation by installing a standard car unit, noting that CarPlay worked “perfectly,” but that they still had some work to do to make everything water-resistant.
But the MRCP9685A neatly dodges that issue: it’s designed with “marine-grade” weatherproofing, meaning you’ll be able to install it in any boat that accepts a standard double DIN head unit. In addition to support for CarPlay and Android Auto (over a standard USB cable, just like a car), the MRCP9685A also features support for Bluetooth audio, rear camera inputs for cars, and an integrated radio tuner.
Of course, being an aftermarket head unit, you’ll still need to install the MRCP9685A yourself (or hire a professional to do it for you). But if you’ve been dying for a way to use Android Nautical or BoatPlay out on the water, Boss Audio’s new setup seems like it could be the answer.


theverge--2020-10-05--Dune delayed to October 1st, 2021

Dune delayed to October 1st, 2021

Dune is the latest movie to get pushed back to 2021 , following a number of other highly anticipated blockbuster films , including Black Widow and No Time to Die .
It ’ ll now be released on October 1st , 2021 — nearly a full year after the original December 18th release date , Collider and The Wrap have reported .
The Dune delay comes after Regal and Cineworld announced that it would be shuttering all of its theaters in the US and the UK , following the delay of No Time to Die last week .
With more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ scheduled to debut this fall moving to 2021 due to concerns over the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic , there ’ s simply not enough new content for theaters to show right now .
Dune ’ s changed release date isn ’ t too much of a surprise , as studios are continuously trying to figure out the best time to release their biggest movies .
Warner Bros. already delayed another of its movies , Wonder Woman 1984 , from October to December 25th .
Industry insiders assumed that with Wonder Woman 1984 moving to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was originally scheduled to be released , Denis Villeneuve ’ s adaptation would likely be punted to 2021 .
That October 1st date is a bit confusing , though , given that Warner Bros. has already delayed a major 2020 film to that date : Robert Pattinson ’ s The Batman is already slated for the same day , meaning it ’ s likely that one of the two Warner Bros. blockbusters will be shifting again .
Warner Bros. is giving itself some wiggle room , though .
When the studio premiered the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ film ’ s release date was specifically left out .
All the trailer said is “ coming to theaters.
” It seems like Warner Bros. learned from its experience with Christopher Nolan ’ s Tenet , which was delayed a few times leading to marketing kerfuffles .
‘ Dune ’ fans will have to wait nearly a full year to see the highly anticipated adaptation Keeping dates out of trailers isn ’ t the only thing Warner Bros. learned from Tenet .
The studio released the film internationally on August 26th , before @ @ @ @ @ @ @ China on September 3rd .
The film was only able to play in select cities and was kept out of key markets like Los Angeles and New York City .
Tenet has only generated $ 36.1 million Stateside , but the film has seen much bigger success internationally , racking up more than $ 203 million .
While that doesn ’ t make the film profitable for Warner Bros. , it may be enough incentive to keep Wonder Woman 1984 in the December 25th spot , while moving Dune to a period when @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to movie theaters .
Warner Bros. isn ’ t the only studio in this position , either .
Disney has delayed many of its big films , including Black Widow .
Scarlett Johansson ’ s standalone Marvel movie will now open on May 7th , 2021 , instead of November 6th , 2020 .
This makes 2020 the first year without a Marvel Cinematic Universe film since 2009 .
As part of the delay , other Marvel titles like Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings and The Eternals are also delayed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ The King ’ s Man , two films Disney inherited from its acquisition of 21st Century Fox , also moved to 2021 .
Is it fair to say that 2020 is mostly a wash for film studios ?
Sure .
Only a handful of major blockbusters still remain on the theatrical schedule for this year , including Wonder Woman 1984 , Free Guy , Pixar ’ s Soul , and Death on the Nile .
Some films have performed well via digital rental platforms — Trolls World Tour allegedly made $ 100 million @ @ @ @ @ @ @ part , executives are hopeful 2021 will be a much better year .

Dune is the latest movie to get pushed back to 2021, following a number of other highly anticipated blockbuster films, including Black Widow and No Time to Die. It’ll now be released on October 1st, 2021 — nearly a full year after the original December 18th release date, Collider and The Wrap have reported.
The Dune delay comes after Regal and Cineworld announced that it would be shuttering all of its theaters in the US and the UK, following the delay of No Time to Die last week. With more and more major films that were originally scheduled to debut this fall moving to 2021 due to concerns over the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, there’s simply not enough new content for theaters to show right now.
Dune’s changed release date isn’t too much of a surprise, as studios are continuously trying to figure out the best time to release their biggest movies. Warner Bros. already delayed another of its movies, Wonder Woman 1984, from October to December 25th. Industry insiders assumed that with Wonder Woman 1984 moving to December, the same month that Dune was originally scheduled to be released, Denis Villeneuve’s adaptation would likely be punted to 2021.
That October 1st date is a bit confusing, though, given that Warner Bros. has already delayed a major 2020 film to that date: Robert Pattinson’s The Batman is already slated for the same day, meaning it’s likely that one of the two Warner Bros. blockbusters will be shifting again.
Warner Bros. is giving itself some wiggle room, though. When the studio premiered the first Dune trailer in September, the film’s release date was specifically left out. All the trailer said is “coming to theaters.” It seems like Warner Bros. learned from its experience with Christopher Nolan’s Tenet, which was delayed a few times leading to marketing kerfuffles.
‘Dune’ fans will have to wait nearly a full year to see the highly anticipated adaptation
Keeping dates out of trailers isn’t the only thing Warner Bros. learned from Tenet. The studio released the film internationally on August 26th, before bringing it to the United States and China on September 3rd. The film was only able to play in select cities and was kept out of key markets like Los Angeles and New York City. Tenet has only generated $36.1 million Stateside, but the film has seen much bigger success internationally, racking up more than $203 million. While that doesn’t make the film profitable for Warner Bros., it may be enough incentive to keep Wonder Woman 1984 in the December 25th spot, while moving Dune to a period when more people may be able to get to movie theaters.
Warner Bros. isn’t the only studio in this position, either. Disney has delayed many of its big films, including Black Widow. Scarlett Johansson’s standalone Marvel movie will now open on May 7th, 2021, instead of November 6th, 2020. This makes 2020 the first year without a Marvel Cinematic Universe film since 2009. As part of the delay, other Marvel titles like Shang-Chi and the Legend of the Ten Rings and The Eternals are also delayed. Meanwhile, West Side Story and The King’s Man, two films Disney inherited from its acquisition of 21st Century Fox, also moved to 2021.


theverge--2020-10-06--A champion has been crowned in Fat Bear Week

The votes are in for Katmai National Park ’ s annual Fat Bear Week tournament and 747 is the champion !
There couldn ’ t have been a more epic matchup than the championship face-off between two aptly named bears : 747 and Chunk , aka Bear 32 .
In the end , 747 pulled ahead with more than 47,300 votes compared to Chunk ’ s roughly 21,900 votes .
The annual elimination tournament began in 2014 as a way to celebrate how fat and healthy the park ’ s bears are .
Katmai is one of the most famous @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Visitors to the park and its Bear Cam webpage can watch the bears splash around in the Brooks River and binge on migrating sockeye salmon .
Competition aside , the bears are on a mission to consume enough calories to last them throughout the long winter ahead , when they might hibernate blissfully in their dens for up to six months .
If only we could do the same .
This year ’ s champion , 747 , is one of the park ’ s biggest bears and was estimated to weigh over @ @ @ @ @ @ @ .
It was the first time the park was able to gauge the actual weight of the gargantuan bears by using a 3D scanner .
As a boss bear , Chunk easily dominates some of the best fishing spots in Katmai — like the coveted “ jacuzzi ” below the Brooks Falls , which Katmai describes as a sort of “ plunge pool ” where the bears can simply sit and wait for the fish to come close enough for them to pin with their paws or voluptuous figures .
Chunk is another @ @ @ @ @ @ @ at over 1,100 pounds last September .
Even though Chunk sits at “ the top tier of the bear hierarchy , ” according to Katmai , he ’ s been a surprisingly gentle giant lately .
He ’ s been known to push other bears out of his way in the past but has recently been seen playing around with other bears and patiently waiting to scavenge leftovers from others .
There ’ s a lot to appreciate in a bear that leads by example ; we could all use a little more @ @ @ @ @ @ @ year .

The votes are in for Katmai National Park’s annual Fat Bear Week tournament and 747 is the champion! There couldn’t have been a more epic matchup than the championship face-off between two aptly named bears: 747 and Chunk, aka Bear 32. In the end, 747 pulled ahead with more than 47,300 votes compared to Chunk’s roughly 21,900 votes.
The annual elimination tournament began in 2014 as a way to celebrate how fat and healthy the park’s bears are. Katmai is one of the most famous places for bear watching in Alaska. Visitors to the park and its Bear Cam webpage can watch the bears splash around in the Brooks River and binge on migrating sockeye salmon. Competition aside, the bears are on a mission to consume enough calories to last them throughout the long winter ahead, when they might hibernate blissfully in their dens for up to six months. If only we could do the same.
This year’s champion, 747, is one of the park’s biggest bears and was estimated to weigh over 1,400 pounds after bulking up last September. It was the first time the park was able to gauge the actual weight of the gargantuan bears by using a 3D scanner. As a boss bear, Chunk easily dominates some of the best fishing spots in Katmai — like the coveted “jacuzzi” below the Brooks Falls, which Katmai describes as a sort of “plunge pool” where the bears can simply sit and wait for the fish to come close enough for them to pin with their paws or voluptuous figures.


theverge--2020-10-06--The FAA is opening the door a crack for self-flying drones like Skydio to reach their potential

You can ’ t fly a drone at night .
You can ’ t fly a drone over people .
You need to be able to see it with your naked eye at all times — or have a dedicated observer who can .
These rules exist to keep dumb drones ( and reckless pilots ) from crashing into people , property , and other aircraft in the skies .
But what happens when drones get smarter , and can dodge obstacles on their own ?
That ’ s the kind of drone that Skydio builds , and it appears @ @ @ @ @ @ @ create exceptions to that naked-eye , Visual Line Of Sight ( VLOS ) rule .
This week , the FAA granted the North Carolina Department of Transportation ( NCDOT ) a blanket waiver to fly Skydio drones beyond visual line of sight ( BVLOS ) to inspect any bridge , anywhere across the state , for four whole years .
They primarily need to make sure the bridge isn ’ t occupied by random people , and fly within 50 feet of the bridge and 1,500 feet of the drone ’ s pilot @ @ @ @ @ @ @ here ( PDF ) .
It ’ s not the first time the FAA has granted a BVLOS waiver ; the agency has granted limited waivers since the first drone rules rolled out , but early waivers were often for a single flight or series of flights by a licensed pilot who ’ d applied months in advance .
But in 2015 , the FAA signaled that it wanted to enable more advanced uses of drones , particularly beyond visual line of sight , as quickly as it can — and over the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ it start to happen in a bigger way .
Last October , the UPS won FAA approval to operate a “ drone airline ” with a Part 135 Standard certification , allowing its delivery drones to fly beyond visual line of sight .
This August , Amazon ’ s Prime Air got the same certification , too .
And in July , the Chula Vista Police Department in California got approval to fly its Skydio drones beyond visual line of sight in emergency situations , so long as they didn ’ t fly @ @ @ @ @ @ @ nearest obstacle , stay within 1,500 feet of the pilot , and return to VLOS “ as soon as practical.
” Even then , that “ Tactical Beyond Visual Line of Sight ” program for first responders ( which doesn ’ t actually require a Skydio drone , here ’ s the PDF ) required operators to be flying as a public safety operator under Part 91 — an authorization not just anyone can get .
But now , we ’ re talking about a waiver for a consumer-grade drone , under the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ for to start a drone business , that applies across an entire state for multiple years at a time .
Sure , the FAA is probably going to trust a specific government agency like the NCDOT a heck of a lot more than a random drone pilot , but it ’ s still a step towards a future where individual , trustworthy pilots could legally fly a drone without constantly squinting to see it in the sky .
Between this , last January ’ s nationwide waiver for State Farm ’ s insurance @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Energy last August to inspect power lines in the eight states it serves , it seems like we ’ ve crossed a threshold .
Oh , and North Carolina ’ s waiver is probably a good thing for bridge inspectors , too , compared to some of the conventional ways of getting underneath a big , long platform , particularly one that spans a body of water .
Here ’ s Skydio ’ s video about how it does that .
You can actually easily browse all the other companies that have gotten @ @ @ @ @ @ @ operations yourself at this link : just type 107.31 into the search field .
Update 9:58 PM ET : Added additional BVLOS precedents , and a link where you can find more .

You can’t fly a drone at night. You can’t fly a drone over people. You need to be able to see it with your naked eye at all times — or have a dedicated observer who can. These rules exist to keep dumb drones (and reckless pilots) from crashing into people, property, and other aircraft in the skies.
But what happens when drones get smarter, and can dodge obstacles on their own? That’s the kind of drone that Skydio builds, and it appears to be successfully convincing the FAA to create exceptions to that naked-eye, Visual Line Of Sight (VLOS) rule.
This week, the FAA granted the North Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) a blanket waiver to fly Skydio drones beyond visual line of sight (BVLOS) to inspect any bridge, anywhere across the state, for four whole years. They primarily need to make sure the bridge isn’t occupied by random people, and fly within 50 feet of the bridge and 1,500 feet of the drone’s pilot. You can see the full waiver here (PDF).
It’s not the first time the FAA has granted a BVLOS waiver; the agency has granted limited waivers since the first drone rules rolled out, but early waivers were often for a single flight or series of flights by a licensed pilot who’d applied months in advance. But in 2015, the FAA signaled that it wanted to enable more advanced uses of drones, particularly beyond visual line of sight, as quickly as it can — and over the past year, we’ve seen it start to happen in a bigger way.
Last October, the UPS won FAA approval to operate a “drone airline” with a Part 135 Standard certification, allowing its delivery drones to fly beyond visual line of sight. This August, Amazon’s Prime Air got the same certification, too.
And in July, the Chula Vista Police Department in California got approval to fly its Skydio drones beyond visual line of sight in emergency situations, so long as they didn’t fly higher than 50 feet higher than the nearest obstacle, stay within 1,500 feet of the pilot, and return to VLOS “as soon as practical.”
A big milestone
Even then, that “Tactical Beyond Visual Line of Sight” program for first responders (which doesn’t actually require a Skydio drone, here’s the PDF) required operators to be flying as a public safety operator under Part 91 — an authorization not just anyone can get.
But now, we’re talking about a waiver for a consumer-grade drone, under the standard Part 107 license anyone can apply for to start a drone business, that applies across an entire state for multiple years at a time. Sure, the FAA is probably going to trust a specific government agency like the NCDOT a heck of a lot more than a random drone pilot, but it’s still a step towards a future where individual, trustworthy pilots could legally fly a drone without constantly squinting to see it in the sky.
Between this, last January’s nationwide waiver for State Farm’s insurance inspectors, and a waiver for Xcel Energy last August to inspect power lines in the eight states it serves, it seems like we’ve crossed a threshold.
Oh, and North Carolina’s waiver is probably a good thing for bridge inspectors, too, compared to some of the conventional ways of getting underneath a big, long platform, particularly one that spans a body of water. Here’s Skydio’s video about how it does that.
You can actually easily browse all the other companies that have gotten BVLOS waivers for their Part 107 drone operations yourself at this link: just type 107.31 into the search field.


theverge--2020-10-06--The Supreme Court is taking on Google and Oracle one last time

Ten years after Oracle first sued Google over the code in the Android platform , the two tech giants are finally facing off in the Supreme Court .
Since then , there have been three trials and two appeals .
Billions of dollars are at stake ; many millions have been likely spent on a parade of seasoned litigators , expert witnesses , and bizarre trial exhibits intended to explain programming to non-technical juries .
All this may be coming to an anticlimactic close on Wednesday morning , with a teleconference Supreme Court oral argument in the middle of a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , it decided to make the mobile platform compatible with Java .
At the time , apps for the iOS environment were written in Objective-C , a language that was similar to the ubiquitous C but otherwise pretty much only used in the context of iOS app development .
Apple had a significant head start in mobile .
Google was aiming to make Android competitive by making the platform interoperable with Java , a popular programming language with a robust developer community .
In order to do that , the company reimplemented several @ @ @ @ @ @ @ are at issue in the lawsuit .
For Oracle and Google , the lawsuit is about whether Oracle — which owns Java Standard Edition — is now entitled to a piece of Android , to the tune of billions of dollars .
For everyone else , the lawsuit is about whether language compatibility is tantamount to copyright infringement .
To say the very least , it was a different world when the case was first filed .
Both companies have changed hands — the lawsuit began while Larry Ellison was still at the @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the CEO of Google .
Google is now a subsidiary of Alphabet .
Android is on version 11 .
The only thing that seems to have stayed the same is the popularity of Java as a programming language .
But far away from Silicon Valley , there ’ s been a sea change that encompasses much more than a mere $ 6 billion and the future of copyright law .
Three Supreme Court seats have been vacated since the last time Google asked the high court to review its case .
In 2014 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ case back to the district court in San Francisco for a retrial .
Since then , one justice has retired and two have passed away — most recently , Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
The absolute least important part of Ginsburg ’ s legacy is that she was the most reliable vote in copyright law cases , tending to vote in favor of rights-holders .
Her loss also means that Google v. Oracle is being heard by eight justices and is therefore prone to a split court .
( In the 1996 software @ @ @ @ @ @ @ eight-justice court split evenly and was unable to set national precedent ) .
When Google v. Oracle began in 2010 , it involved seven patents as well as a copyright claim ; by 2012 , the case had been whittled down to a mere 37 Java APIs , made up of about 11,500 lines of code .
( The various versions of Android range from 12 to 14 billion lines of code ) .
The 11,500 lines of code at issue were written in a “ clean room , ” a project siloed @ @ @ @ @ @ @ reverse-engineering .
This feat of engineering became necessary when negotiations between Google and Sun Microsystems — which owned the Java platform — failed .
Oracle acquired Sun in early 2010 ; by August , it had filed suit against Google .
An application programming interface ( API ) in this context is a collection of well-defined interactions in software programming .
It is a shorthand to quickly access services , libraries , and other functions .
An API can condense commonly used or verbose code , allowing programmers to build without having to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ not exactly a dictionary , but it ’ s close enough to one that Oracle v. Google poses a huge problem .
Technically , you can program in Java without using the 37 Java API packages at issue .
But you probably wouldn ’ t be writing anything useful , since those APIs include java.lang and java.util , basic packages that offer functions like doing math or representing dates and times .
I can also technically write this article without any metaphors or similes , but it ’ s not something that I @ @ @ @ @ @ @ anyone would want to read .
To be clear , the 37 Java APIs were reimplemented in a clean room .
Oracle is not asserting that they are verbatim the same , but rather that the “ structure , sequence , and organization ” of the APIs are so similar as to violate copyright law .
By this , it means that the packages , classes , and methods in these APIs are named the same .
A line of code written to run in Java Standard Edition won ’ t necessarily run @ @ @ @ @ @ @ come a lot closer than it would have otherwise .
The very first run at the lawsuit resulted in a bifurcated trial in 2012 — one trial for the patent claims , and a second trial just for the copyright claims .
In the patent trial , the jury ruled that Google had not infringed any patents .
In the copyright trial , two separate legal points were at issue : first , whether the declaring code and “ structure , sequence , and organization ” of the APIs were copyrightable ; and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was a fair use .
The judge ruled on the copyrightability issue , and sent the fair use issue to be assessed by the jury .
The jury hung on fair use .
But the judge — who coincidentally wrote code as a hobby — ruled that the declaring code and SSO of the APIs were not covered by copyright after all .
The Copyright Act does not apply to any “ idea , procedure , process , system , method of operation , ” and the way that the packages , classes @ @ @ @ @ @ @ was too functional to be deemed worthy of copyright .
It was this specific ruling that was overturned by the Federal Circuit in 2014 .
Because the first jury had hung on fair use , an entirely new jury had to be convened for yet another trial on fair use in 2016 .
The jury sided with Google .
But in 2018 , the Federal Circuit — the same appeals court that in 2014 had sent the case back to the jury — ruled that the jury verdict had to be set aside @ @ @ @ @ @ @ evidence presented at trial clearly indicated that no fair use determination could be reached , and therefore should not have gone to a jury in the first place .
Setting aside a jury verdict is Big Judge Energy in a way that is bound to be controversial to the Supreme Court , and it ’ s likely that Wednesday ’ s oral argument will feature a good deal of discussion about the role of judge versus jury in a copyright case .
The question of who gets to decide fair use , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ extrapolated out to a lot of different legal cases ( which SCOTUS loves ) and also has nothing to do with math ( which SCOTUS does not love ) .
Unfortunately the real heart of the case lies in the part with all the math and such .
The Supreme Court ’ s decision in Google v. Oracle might have huge ramifications for the software industry , most importantly because the Supreme Court may be revisiting the copyrightability issue — the question of whether the declaring code and structure , sequence , and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ by copyright law at all — which hasn ’ t been in play since 2014 .
This decade-long grudge match between Google and Oracle is not an entirely rational one .
Google ’ s reimplementation of the Java APIs is part of a long tradition of iteration that was mostly taken for granted until now .
Products like Oracle ’ s own MySQL were created as iterations of IBM ’ s SQL .
This is not to say that copy-pasting is the heart of Silicon Valley .
But there is a point at @ @ @ @ @ @ @ look the same , rather than to be different for the sake of difference .
To put things roughly : coding is the process of speaking to the machine .
But very few people who develop software in this day and age actually speak directly to the machine .
Software exists in layers upon iterative layers , a game of whispers that eventually reaches the bare metal of the computer .
New languages are derived from the old ; new libraries are built on existing ones ; dependencies are stacked on top of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that is about to end at any moment .
And Google v. Oracle is a case that is happening at one of the lowest levels of an ongoing game of Jenga .
We ’ re about to find out whether the Supreme Court knows it .

Ten years after Oracle first sued Google over the code in the Android platform, the two tech giants are finally facing off in the Supreme Court. Since then, there have been three trials and two appeals. Billions of dollars are at stake; many millions have been likely spent on a parade of seasoned litigators, expert witnesses, and bizarre trial exhibits intended to explain programming to non-technical juries. All this may be coming to an anticlimactic close on Wednesday morning, with a teleconference Supreme Court oral argument in the middle of a pandemic.
When Google first developed Android, it decided to make the mobile platform compatible with Java. At the time, apps for the iOS environment were written in Objective-C, a language that was similar to the ubiquitous C but otherwise pretty much only used in the context of iOS app development. Apple had a significant head start in mobile.
Google was aiming to make Android competitive by making the platform interoperable with Java, a popular programming language with a robust developer community. In order to do that, the company reimplemented several Java APIs, including the 37 that are at issue in the lawsuit. For Oracle and Google, the lawsuit is about whether Oracle — which owns Java Standard Edition — is now entitled to a piece of Android, to the tune of billions of dollars. For everyone else, the lawsuit is about whether language compatibility is tantamount to copyright infringement.
To say the very least, it was a different world when the case was first filed. Both companies have changed hands — the lawsuit began while Larry Ellison was still at the helm of Oracle and Eric Schmidt was the CEO of Google. Google is now a subsidiary of Alphabet. Android is on version 11. The only thing that seems to have stayed the same is the popularity of Java as a programming language.
But far away from Silicon Valley, there’s been a sea change that encompasses much more than a mere $6 billion and the future of copyright law. Three Supreme Court seats have been vacated since the last time Google asked the high court to review its case. In 2014, SCOTUS denied certiorari, sending the case back to the district court in San Francisco for a retrial. Since then, one justice has retired and two have passed away — most recently, Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg.
The absolute least important part of Ginsburg’s legacy is that she was the most reliable vote in copyright law cases, tending to vote in favor of rights-holders. Her loss also means that Google v. Oracle is being heard by eight justices and is therefore prone to a split court. (In the 1996 software copyright case Lotus v. Borland, an eight-justice court split evenly and was unable to set national precedent).
When Google v. Oracle began in 2010, it involved seven patents as well as a copyright claim; by 2012, the case had been whittled down to a mere 37 Java APIs, made up of about 11,500 lines of code. (Estimates put Android around 12 million lines of code.) The 11,500 lines of code at issue were written in a “clean room,” a project siloed away from the existing code they were reverse-engineering. This feat of engineering became necessary when negotiations between Google and Sun Microsystems — which owned the Java platform — failed. Oracle acquired Sun in early 2010; by August, it had filed suit against Google.
An application programming interface (API) in this context is a collection of well-defined interactions in software programming. It is a shorthand to quickly access services, libraries, and other functions. An API can condense commonly used or verbose code, allowing programmers to build without having to reinvent the wheel.
An API is not exactly a dictionary, but it’s close enough to one that Oracle v. Google poses a huge problem. Technically, you can program in Java without using the 37 Java API packages at issue. But you probably wouldn’t be writing anything useful, since those APIs include java.lang and java.util, basic packages that offer functions like doing math or representing dates and times. I can also technically write this article without any metaphors or similes, but it’s not something that I would want to do, or that anyone would want to read.
To be clear, the 37 Java APIs were reimplemented in a clean room. Oracle is not asserting that they are verbatim the same, but rather that the “structure, sequence, and organization” of the APIs are so similar as to violate copyright law. By this, it means that the packages, classes, and methods in these APIs are named the same. A line of code written to run in Java Standard Edition won’t necessarily run on Android, but it’ll come a lot closer than it would have otherwise.
The very first run at the lawsuit resulted in a bifurcated trial in 2012 — one trial for the patent claims, and a second trial just for the copyright claims. In the patent trial, the jury ruled that Google had not infringed any patents. In the copyright trial, two separate legal points were at issue: first, whether the declaring code and “structure, sequence, and organization” of the APIs were copyrightable; and second, whether Google’s use was a fair use. The judge ruled on the copyrightability issue, and sent the fair use issue to be assessed by the jury.
The jury hung on fair use. But the judge — who coincidentally wrote code as a hobby — ruled that the declaring code and SSO of the APIs were not covered by copyright after all. The Copyright Act does not apply to any “idea, procedure, process, system, method of operation,” and the way that the packages, classes, and methods were named and sorted was too functional to be deemed worthy of copyright.
It was this specific ruling that was overturned by the Federal Circuit in 2014. Because the first jury had hung on fair use, an entirely new jury had to be convened for yet another trial on fair use in 2016. The jury sided with Google.
But in 2018, the Federal Circuit — the same appeals court that in 2014 had sent the case back to the jury — ruled that the jury verdict had to be set aside in favor of Oracle, because the evidence presented at trial clearly indicated that no fair use determination could be reached, and therefore should not have gone to a jury in the first place.
Setting aside a jury verdict is Big Judge Energy in a way that is bound to be controversial to the Supreme Court, and it’s likely that Wednesday’s oral argument will feature a good deal of discussion about the role of judge versus jury in a copyright case. The question of who gets to decide fair use, and when, is something that can be extrapolated out to a lot of different legal cases (which SCOTUS loves) and also has nothing to do with math (which SCOTUS does not love).
Unfortunately the real heart of the case lies in the part with all the math and such. The Supreme Court’s decision in Google v. Oracle might have huge ramifications for the software industry, most importantly because the Supreme Court may be revisiting the copyrightability issue — the question of whether the declaring code and structure, sequence, and organization of the Java APIs are covered by copyright law at all — which hasn’t been in play since 2014.
This decade-long grudge match between Google and Oracle is not an entirely rational one. Google’s reimplementation of the Java APIs is part of a long tradition of iteration that was mostly taken for granted until now. Products like Oracle’s own MySQL were created as iterations of IBM’s SQL.
This is not to say that copy-pasting is the heart of Silicon Valley. But there is a point at which you want to encourage things to look the same, rather than to be different for the sake of difference. To put things roughly: coding is the process of speaking to the machine. But very few people who develop software in this day and age actually speak directly to the machine. Software exists in layers upon iterative layers, a game of whispers that eventually reaches the bare metal of the computer. New languages are derived from the old; new libraries are built on existing ones; dependencies are stacked on top of each other like a game of Jenga that is about to end at any moment. And Google v. Oracle is a case that is happening at one of the lowest levels of an ongoing game of Jenga.
We’re about to find out whether the Supreme Court knows it.


theverge--2020-10-06--As movies slip and Regal shuts doors again, many theaters may not survive the maelstrom

James Bond may have been the last straw for Regal and Cineworld , but analysts I spoke to agree : the only thing that will truly save movie theaters in the United States is a COVID-19 vaccine .
On Thursday , Regal Cinemas — the second-largest theater chain in the US with 536 theaters and 7,076 screens — will officially shut all its doors in the United States for the second time during the global pandemic .
Its parent company Cineworld is closing 127 theaters in the UK as well .
Over 45,000 people may lose their jobs or be @ @ @ @ @ @ @ timeline for reopening .
In what seems like good news , AMC and Cinemark , the first- and third-largest US chains respectively , will not be following Regal ’ s lead .
Each confirmed today that over 80 percent of their US-based theaters are open and will stay open despite Regal ’ s decision .
But if you love the theaters , you shouldn ’ t necessarily take that as a reprieve — even with Regal out of the picture , AMC and Cinemark are fighting over pieces of a pie so small @ @ @ @ @ @ @ up starving .
Financial records show AMC lost $ 2.7 billion in the first six months of 2020 , and Cinemark lost $ 230 million .
“ They ’ re in a state of no revenue ” That ’ s not surprising because revenue all but evaporated for each company when people stopped going to the theaters , dropping 98.7 percent for AMC and 99 percent for Cinemark compared to the previous summer , to just under $ 20 million and under $ 10 million , respectively — compared to the $ 65 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ “ They ’ re in a state of no revenue , and that ’ s about as dire a situation as you can imagine , ” says Benchmark analyst Mike Hickey .
Each chain publicly said it can only hold out through part of 2021 unless things change — despite taking on hundreds of millions of dollars in debt this year , renegotiating rents with their landlords , laying off tens of thousands of employees , reducing salaries , and closing some small number of theaters permanently .
It ’ s largely a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ analyst Michael Pachter .
The big chains largely don ’ t own their own buildings , so even if they stop screening movies , furlough their employees , and stop selling food — Cinemark had to throw out $ 2.4 million worth of perishable food last quarter — they ’ ve still got to pay rent , and there ’ s only a matter of time before landlords , many of whom need to pay their own mortgages , will come to collect .
“ If we don ’ t get some visibility @ @ @ @ @ @ @ how long the landlords are going to be patient , ” says Pachter .
And that ’ s just the remaining majors , which ( along with Regal ) accounted for only 53 percent of movie screens in the United States .
On September 30th , the National Association of Theatre Owners warned Congress that “ 69 percent of small and mid-sized theater companies will be forced to file for bankruptcy ” if things continue as they did in Q2 .
“ A lot of them are small chains , mom and pop @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a lot of them won ’ t be able to survive this , ” Hickey says .
Now , things aren ’ t quite as bad now as they were in Q2 , because those numbers are from when theaters were largely closed in the US .
AMC and Cinemark only began reopening for real in August , ahead of the release of Christopher Nolan ’ s Tenet .
Theaters had hoped Tenet would bring back crowds , and its director and owners had repeatedly insisted the film wouldn ’ t skip theaters @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ‘ Tenet ’ was the test , and it didn ’ t make the grade But Tenet opened at just $ 20 million over Labor Day weekend , a number that could only be generously viewed as “ good ” given the pandemic , and it didn ’ t even manage to cross $ 30 million by September 13th .
It ’ s now passed $ 300 million in global box office receipts , but Exhibitor Relations analyst Jeff Bock tells us that might not nearly be good enough : with a budget @ @ @ @ @ @ @ marketing campaign , the film might have needed $ 450 million to break even .
“ This is a high-stakes game , and with Tenet probably maxing out at $ 350M worldwide , that ’ s just not going to cut it , ” he says , adding that it was estimated to be a $ 700 million film before the pandemic .
That ’ s a lot of popcorn and candy that theaters aren ’ t selling ( which is largely how theaters make money ) .
After seeing the early Tenet @ @ @ @ @ @ @ to risk Wonder Woman 1984 on those audiences , pushing it to Christmas Day .
But in the wake of No Time to Die and Dune each being pushed back a year and Regal Cinemas shuttering , we ’ re wondering whether Wonder Woman will actually arrive this Christmas .
What will theaters do if Wonder Woman ( or Disney / Pixar ’ s Soul , the other big family film due out this year ) are further delayed ?
A lot of hopes pinned on ‘ Wonder Woman ’ and ‘ Soul @ @ @ @ @ @ @ get people back to the movies , ” says Hickey , arguing that the studios and theater owners will need to coordinate if theaters are to survive , instead of continually pushing movies back .
He says it ’ s a good sign Disney hasn ’ t delayed Soul yet , and that if key markets like Los Angeles and New York reopen their theaters , maintain safety requirements , and “ play some good movies , ” he thinks audiences will start to return .
But Pachter argues it won ’ t @ @ @ @ @ @ @ because people are still afraid of potentially catching COVID-19 — “ Imagine being in the theater and hearing somebody cough , ” he asks me — and neither Benchmark nor Wedbush is expecting things to normalize anytime soon .
“ The box office is pretty much destroyed from mid-March of 2020 to mid-March of 2021 , ” says Pachter , calling it “ a lost year ” for the industry .
Hickey says his company ’ s models bring us “ close to normal ” in 2022 .
And while Pachter thinks it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ the studios to keep pushing back films right now and hope they ’ ll find an audience later — particularly because the pandemic initially created a multi-month hole in film production , too , leaving a gap for these films — they won ’ t be able to do that forever because there isn ’ t enough room .
With 130 major studio releases each year , there are only so many movies that can get pushed before there are too many for theaters to screen .
“ [ We ] have to @ @ @ @ @ @ @ or more ) of the major chains — AMC , Regal , Cinemark — may not survive if this goes into next summer , ” says Bock , referring to COVID-19 ’ s impact on theaters .
There are many factors that could keep a vaccine from arriving before then .
But even if one or more of the big theater chains go under , it ’ s not necessarily the end of American big-screen cinema .
No one I spoke to believes that Disney ’ s experiment to skip theaters with Mulan @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Netflix , Amazon , and other streamers will simply snap up the big blockbuster films , killing theaters in the process .
Studios still need theaters to maximize their returns .
“ The theaters will survive ; they just may not be run by the same people , ” says Pachter .
He points out that it ’ s not easy to simply turn a multiplex into a department store , and he suggests that while hundreds or thousands of theaters might close , the failing movie chains might simply be snapped up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ is coming .
If it comes a year from now , I think the owners of the listing chains will change out .
If it ’ s in the next three months , all of them survive , ” says Pachter .
“ Even if the announcement is 10 months from now , I think landlords would work with the movie chains and not force them to go away .
It ’ s the not-knowing that ’ s the risk.
” So like the rest of US society , the theaters remain in @ @

James Bond may have been the last straw for Regal and Cineworld, but analysts I spoke to agree: the only thing that will truly save movie theaters in the United States is a COVID-19 vaccine.
On Thursday, Regal Cinemas — the second-largest theater chain in the US with 536 theaters and 7,076 screens — will officially shut all its doors in the United States for the second time during the global pandemic. Its parent company Cineworld is closing 127 theaters in the UK as well. Over 45,000 people may lose their jobs or be furloughed, and there’s no timeline for reopening.
In what seems like good news, AMC and Cinemark, the first- and third-largest US chains respectively, will not be following Regal’s lead. Each confirmed today that over 80 percent of their US-based theaters are open and will stay open despite Regal’s decision.
But if you love the theaters, you shouldn’t necessarily take that as a reprieve — even with Regal out of the picture, AMC and Cinemark are fighting over pieces of a pie so small that both of them could still wind up starving. Financial records show AMC lost $2.7 billion in the first six months of 2020, and Cinemark lost $230 million.
“They’re in a state of no revenue”
That’s not surprising because revenue all but evaporated for each company when people stopped going to the theaters, dropping 98.7 percent for AMC and 99 percent for Cinemark compared to the previous summer, to just under $20 million and under $10 million, respectively — compared to the $65 million that Cinemark paid in rent. “They’re in a state of no revenue, and that’s about as dire a situation as you can imagine,” says Benchmark analyst Mike Hickey.
Each chain publicly said it can only hold out through part of 2021 unless things change — despite taking on hundreds of millions of dollars in debt this year, renegotiating rents with their landlords, laying off tens of thousands of employees, reducing salaries, and closing some small number of theaters permanently.
Cinemark sold just $37,000 worth of tickets and $124,000 of concessions in Q2. Image: Cinemark
When the theaters are closed, many costs drop dramatically — but that’s still $65M worth of rent in Q2. Image: Cinemark
It’s largely a matter of rent, explains Wedbush Securities analyst Michael Pachter. The big chains largely don’t own their own buildings, so even if they stop screening movies, furlough their employees, and stop selling food — Cinemark had to throw out $2.4 million worth of perishable food last quarter — they’ve still got to pay rent, and there’s only a matter of time before landlords, many of whom need to pay their own mortgages, will come to collect. “If we don’t get some visibility to a vaccine soon, you wonder how long the landlords are going to be patient,” says Pachter.
And that’s just the remaining majors, which (along with Regal) accounted for only 53 percent of movie screens in the United States. On September 30th, the National Association of Theatre Owners warned Congress that “69 percent of small and mid-sized theater companies will be forced to file for bankruptcy” if things continue as they did in Q2. “A lot of them are small chains, mom and pop businesses, generational sometimes. I think a lot of them won’t be able to survive this,” Hickey says.
Now, things aren’t quite as bad now as they were in Q2, because those numbers are from when theaters were largely closed in the US. AMC and Cinemark only began reopening for real in August, ahead of the release of Christopher Nolan’s Tenet. Theaters had hoped Tenet would bring back crowds, and its director and owners had repeatedly insisted the film wouldn’t skip theaters and needed to be seen there.
‘Tenet’ was the test, and it didn’t make the grade
But Tenet opened at just $20 million over Labor Day weekend, a number that could only be generously viewed as “good” given the pandemic, and it didn’t even manage to cross $30 million by September 13th. It’s now passed $300 million in global box office receipts, but Exhibitor Relations analyst Jeff Bock tells us that might not nearly be good enough: with a budget of $205 million plus a huge marketing campaign, the film might have needed $450 million to break even.
“This is a high-stakes game, and with Tenet probably maxing out at $350M worldwide, that’s just not going to cut it,” he says, adding that it was estimated to be a $700 million film before the pandemic. That’s a lot of popcorn and candy that theaters aren’t selling (which is largely how theaters make money).
After seeing the early Tenet receipts, Warner Bros. quickly decided not to risk Wonder Woman 1984 on those audiences, pushing it to Christmas Day. But in the wake of No Time to Die and Dune each being pushed back a year and Regal Cinemas shuttering, we’re wondering whether Wonder Woman will actually arrive this Christmas.
What will theaters do if Wonder Woman (or Disney / Pixar’s Soul, the other big family film due out this year) are further delayed?
A lot of hopes pinned on ‘Wonder Woman’ and ‘Soul’
“You need good content to get people back to the movies,” says Hickey, arguing that the studios and theater owners will need to coordinate if theaters are to survive, instead of continually pushing movies back. He says it’s a good sign Disney hasn’t delayed Soul yet, and that if key markets like Los Angeles and New York reopen their theaters, maintain safety requirements, and “play some good movies,” he thinks audiences will start to return.
But Pachter argues it won’t matter until there’s a vaccine because people are still afraid of potentially catching COVID-19 — “Imagine being in the theater and hearing somebody cough,” he asks me — and neither Benchmark nor Wedbush is expecting things to normalize anytime soon. “The box office is pretty much destroyed from mid-March of 2020 to mid-March of 2021,” says Pachter, calling it “a lost year” for the industry. Hickey says his company’s models bring us “close to normal” in 2022.
And while Pachter thinks it’s “very easy” for the studios to keep pushing back films right now and hope they’ll find an audience later — particularly because the pandemic initially created a multi-month hole in film production, too, leaving a gap for these films — they won’t be able to do that forever because there isn’t enough room. With 130 major studio releases each year, there are only so many movies that can get pushed before there are too many for theaters to screen.
“[We] have to prepare for the inevitability that one (or more) of the major chains — AMC, Regal, Cinemark — may not survive if this goes into next summer,” says Bock, referring to COVID-19’s impact on theaters. There are many factors that could keep a vaccine from arriving before then. But even if one or more of the big theater chains go under, it’s not necessarily the end of American big-screen cinema.
No one I spoke to believes that Disney’s experiment to skip theaters with Mulan was necessarily a success — or that Netflix, Amazon, and other streamers will simply snap up the big blockbuster films, killing theaters in the process. Studios still need theaters to maximize their returns. “The theaters will survive; they just may not be run by the same people,” says Pachter. He points out that it’s not easy to simply turn a multiplex into a department store, and he suggests that while hundreds or thousands of theaters might close, the failing movie chains might simply be snapped up by new investors.
“A vaccine is coming. If it comes a year from now, I think the owners of the listing chains will change out. If it’s in the next three months, all of them survive,” says Pachter. “Even if the announcement is 10 months from now, I think landlords would work with the movie chains and not force them to go away. It’s the not-knowing that’s the risk.”


theverge--2020-10-06--Facebook completely bans QAnon and labels it a ‘militarized social movement’

Facebook has banned all forms of content related to the radical fringe conspiracy group QAnon with the exception of posts from individual profiles , marking the company ’ s most dramatic escalation in the fight against misinformation and what Facebook is calling “ militarized social movements.
” The company announced the change on its website as an update to its previous moderation sweep in August that banned close to 1,000 QAnon groups .
“ Starting today , we will remove any Facebook Pages , Groups and Instagram accounts representing QAnon , even if they contain no violent content .
This @ @ @ @ @ @ @ in August that removed Pages , Groups and Instagram accounts associated with QAnon when they discussed potential violence while imposing a series of restrictions to limit the reach of other Pages , Groups and Instagram accounts associated with the movement , ” the company writes in its update .
A Facebook spokesperson tells The Verge that while the ban targets organized behavior on the platform , it does not prohibit individuals from posting about QAnon to their person Facebook profiles .
Facebook says QAnon content , which purports that a secret society of @ @ @ @ @ @ @ Donald Trump , represents an “ identified Militarized Social Movement , ” which is prohibited under its current rules .
In other words , Facebook is reclassifying QAnon as no different than an extremist militia group , but not quite on the level of a terrorist organization or full-fledged hate group .
Facebook considers QAnon no different than an extremist militia group “ We are starting to enforce this updated policy today and are removing content accordingly , but this work will take time and need to continue in the coming days and @ @ @ @ @ @ @ We ’ ve been vigilant in enforcing our policy and studying its impact on the platform but we ’ ve seen several issues that led to today ’ s update .
For example , while we ’ ve removed QAnon content that celebrates and supports violence , we ’ ve seen other QAnon content tied to different forms of real world harm , including recent claims that the west coast wildfires were started by certain groups , which diverted attention of local officials from fighting the fires and protecting the public.
” Unlike @ @ @ @ @ @ @ proactive measures to prevent the spread of QAnon , Facebook has been steadily addressing the conspiracy movement ’ s fast growth across its social networks in stages .
That ’ s led many critics to accuse the company of abetting the spread of misinformation and other potentially dangerous real-world side effects of movements like QAnon .
Facebook most recently tried to combat QAnon ’ s takeover of a hashtag , # savethechildren , by injecting “ credible ” information for users to find when searching for child safety content on the platform .
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ and other “ militia and anarchist ” groups .
Update 10/6 , 6:17PM ET : Clarified that Facebook will still allow individuals to post QAnon content to their personal Facebook profiles .

Facebook has banned all forms of content related to the radical fringe conspiracy group QAnon with the exception of posts from individual profiles, marking the company’s most dramatic escalation in the fight against misinformation and what Facebook is calling “militarized social movements.” The company announced the change on its website as an update to its previous moderation sweep in August that banned close to 1,000 QAnon groups.
“Starting today, we will remove any Facebook Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts representing QAnon, even if they contain no violent content. This is an update from the initial policy in August that removed Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts associated with QAnon when they discussed potential violence while imposing a series of restrictions to limit the reach of other Pages, Groups and Instagram accounts associated with the movement,” the company writes in its update. A Facebook spokesperson tells The Verge that while the ban targets organized behavior on the platform, it does not prohibit individuals from posting about QAnon to their person Facebook profiles.
Facebook says QAnon content, which purports that a secret society of pedophiles is plotting against US President Donald Trump, represents an “identified Militarized Social Movement,” which is prohibited under its current rules. In other words, Facebook is reclassifying QAnon as no different than an extremist militia group, but not quite on the level of a terrorist organization or full-fledged hate group.
Facebook considers QAnon no different than an extremist militia group
“We are starting to enforce this updated policy today and are removing content accordingly, but this work will take time and need to continue in the coming days and weeks,” Facebook writes. “We’ve been vigilant in enforcing our policy and studying its impact on the platform but we’ve seen several issues that led to today’s update. For example, while we’ve removed QAnon content that celebrates and supports violence, we’ve seen other QAnon content tied to different forms of real world harm, including recent claims that the west coast wildfires were started by certain groups, which diverted attention of local officials from fighting the fires and protecting the public.”
See more 2020 election coverage from Vox Media (parent company of The Verge), including how to vote and how different policies will impact your community.
Unlike other social platforms that have taken more proactive measures to prevent the spread of QAnon, Facebook has been steadily addressing the conspiracy movement’s fast growth across its social networks in stages. That’s led many critics to accuse the company of abetting the spread of misinformation and other potentially dangerous real-world side effects of movements like QAnon.
Facebook most recently tried to combat QAnon’s takeover of a hashtag, #savethechildren, by injecting “credible” information for users to find when searching for child safety content on the platform. It also banned ads praising the movement and other “militia and anarchist” groups.


theverge--2020-10-06--Arlo’s new wire-free Pro 4 camera doesn’t need a smart home hub

Arlo has announced two new security cameras : the Pro 4 Wire-Free Spotlight Camera and the Ultra 2 Wire-Free Spotlight Camera System .
You can preorder both cameras now ; the Pro 4 starts at $ 199.99 and the Ultra 2 starts at $ 299.99 .
Both cameras are wire-free .
That makes them easier to set up and more convenient to place than many other cameras , since you ’ re not limited by the location of your outlets .
The Arlo Pro 4 connects directly to Wi-Fi — no smart home hub required .
It produces 2K video @ @ @ @ @ @ @ and a 160-degree viewing angle .
It also comes with a built-in spotlight to illuminate intruders , a siren , and two-way audio to communicate with guests .
It can be placed indoors or outdoors , and Arlo says the removable battery lasts up to six months on a charge .
It works with Alexa , Google Assistant , and IFTTT .
Arlo told MacRumors that it ’ s working on HomeKit availability , but the Pro 4 doesn ’ t seem to have it yet .
The higher-end Ultra 2 has 4K @ @ @ @ @ @ @ a 180-degree viewing angle .
Like the Pro 4 , it also includes two-way audio , a spotlight , a siren , color night vision , and six months of battery .
Unlike the Pro 4 , the Ultra 2 supports HomeKit at launch , in addition to Alexa , Google Assistant , and IFTTT .
This product succeeds the Arlo Ultra , Arlo ’ s first-ever 4K security camera that also included a built-in spotlight .
Both cameras ’ predecessors , the Pro 3 and the Ultra , have been universally lauded @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can buy .
They ’ re certainly not a bargain , but their video and audio quality , ease of installation , and the advanced features Arlo ’ s platform offers make them standout choices for multicamera surveillance setups .

Arlo has announced two new security cameras: the Pro 4 Wire-Free Spotlight Camera and the Ultra 2 Wire-Free Spotlight Camera System. You can preorder both cameras now; the Pro 4 starts at $199.99 and the Ultra 2 starts at $299.99.
Both cameras are wire-free. That makes them easier to set up and more convenient to place than many other cameras, since you’re not limited by the location of your outlets.
The Arlo Pro 4 connects directly to Wi-Fi — no smart home hub required. It produces 2K video with HDR, color night vision, and a 160-degree viewing angle. It also comes with a built-in spotlight to illuminate intruders, a siren, and two-way audio to communicate with guests.
The Arlo Pro 4 with the spotlight on. Image: Arlo
It can be placed indoors or outdoors, and Arlo says the removable battery lasts up to six months on a charge. It works with Alexa, Google Assistant, and IFTTT. Arlo told MacRumors that it’s working on HomeKit availability, but the Pro 4 doesn’t seem to have it yet.
The higher-end Ultra 2 has 4K video with HDR, auto-focus, and a 180-degree viewing angle. Like the Pro 4, it also includes two-way audio, a spotlight, a siren, color night vision, and six months of battery.
The Ultra 2 set up next to a door. Image: Arlo
Unlike the Pro 4, the Ultra 2 supports HomeKit at launch, in addition to Alexa, Google Assistant, and IFTTT. This product succeeds the Arlo Ultra, Arlo’s first-ever 4K security camera that also included a built-in spotlight.
Both cameras’ predecessors, the Pro 3 and the Ultra, have been universally lauded as the best home security cameras you can buy. They’re certainly not a bargain, but their video and audio quality, ease of installation, and the advanced features Arlo’s platform offers make them standout choices for multicamera surveillance setups.


theverge--2020-10-06--YouTube will now let you pay to QA test new features

YouTube has changed the way it tests new features : it ’ s now allowing its Premium subscribers access to @ @ @ @ @ pipeline , according to XDA-Developers .
Previously , those features were tested by Google users @ @ @ @ @ test .
Currently , the new features available for Premium subscribers to test include watching @ @ @ @ @ on your YouTube homepage on iOS ; voice searching for YouTube videos on-site ( only @ @ @ @ @ filtering by topic in additional languages .
The language at the top of YouTube ’ @ @ @ @ @ says that Premium members can only access these features for a limited time .
YouTube @ @ @ @ @ month , and it also gives you ad-free viewing , background play , and access @ @ @ @ @ other features .
If you ’ re a YouTube diehard , though , limited time @ @ @ @ @ just be worth it .

YouTube has changed the way it tests new features: it’s now allowing its Premium subscribers access to experimental products in the development pipeline, as first spotted by Android Central. Previously, those features were tested by Google users picked at random to beta test.
Currently, the new features available for Premium subscribers to test include watching videos with sound and seeking on your YouTube homepage on iOS; voice searching for YouTube videos on-site (only on Chrome); and filtering by topic in additional languages. The language at the top of YouTube’s experimental features page also says that Premium members can only access these features for a limited time.


theverge--2020-10-06--Congress releases blockbuster tech antitrust report

The House Judiciary Committee has released its conclusions on whether Amazon , Facebook , Apple , and Google are violating antitrust law .
Its 449-page report criticizes these companies for buying competitors , preferencing their own services , and holding outsized power over smaller businesses that use their platforms .
“ Our investigation revealed an alarming pattern of business practices that degrade competition and stifle innovation , ” said committee member Val Demings ( D-FL ) .
“ Competition must reward the best idea , not the biggest corporate account .
We will take steps necessary to hold rulebreakers accountable.
@ @ @ @ @ @ @ out a number of concrete policy recommendations , which , taken together , would drastically change how the tech industry operates .
It urges Congress to consider passing commercial nondiscrimination rules that would make large companies offer equal terms to companies selling products and services on their platforms .
It recommends barring certain dominant platforms from competing in “ adjacent lines of business ” where they ’ d have a huge advantage .
“ To put it simply , companies that once were scrappy , underdog startups that challenged the status quo have @ @ @ @ @ @ @ saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons , ” the report says .
“ By controlling access to markets , these giants can pick winners and losers throughout our economy .
They not only wield tremendous power , but they also abuse it by charging exorbitant fees , imposing oppressive contract terms , and extracting valuable data from the people and businesses that rely on them.
” “ Competition must reward the best idea , not the biggest corporate account.
” Most broadly , it suggests that Congress define a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ that the laws should be “ designed to protect not just consumers , but also workers , entrepreneurs , independent businesses , open markets , a fair economy , and democratic ideals.
” The report was delayed amid political disagreements in Congress .
The New York Times reported that Republicans split with the Democratic majority over proposed solutions to monopolistic behavior and that they were upset the report didn ’ t discuss claims that tech companies discriminate against conservative users .
Rep. Ken Buck ( R-CO ) circulated an alternative report that described @ @ @ @ @ @ @ conservatives.
” Although there ’ s bipartisan demand for reducing the power of the biggest tech companies , the committee failed to settle on a single vision of how to move forward .
Buck ’ s report , titled “ The Third Way , ” comes to some of the same conclusions .
It praises the majority for proposing “ additional resources and tools ” for antitrust regulatory agencies , including changes to the standard for anticompetitive effects , but it breaks with the primary report on a number of issues , like @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with about 330 pages of the majority report , that these tech companies have been acting anti-competitively , ” Buck told Axios .
“ It ’ s very common for Republicans and Democrats to agree on a problem and offer different solutions to solve a problem.
” The majority recommendations could have sweeping consequences for the biggest tech companies .
They would restrict which lines of business dominant companies could operate in , potentially severing many of the companies into separate entities .
Non-discrimination rules would regulate platforms like Facebook , YouTube , @ @ @ @ @ @ @ phone networks .
While severe , these actions would prevent tech companies from outflanking competitors on their own platforms — and more importantly , using their privileged position on those platforms to gain an unfair advantage .
“ By functioning as critical intermediaries that are also integrated across lines of business , the dominant platforms face a core conflict of interest , ” the report reads .
“ The surveillance data they collect through their intermediary role , meanwhile , lets them exploit that conflict with unrivaled precision.
” Lawmakers also recommend a @ @ @ @ @ @ @ companies , spurred on by the hundreds of acquisitions listed in the report ’ s appendix .
To balance the playing field , the report suggests a shift in presumption for any merger submitted by a major tech company .
“ Under this change , any acquisition by a dominant platform would be presumed anticompetitive unless the merging parties could show that the transaction was necessary for serving the public interest , ” the report reads .
Underlying all of it would be more vigorous enforcement of antitrust law , enabled by targeted @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , the report asks Congress to restate existing antitrust laws , “ clarifying that they are designed to protect not just consumers but also workers , entrepreneurs , independent businesses , open markets , a fair economy , and democratic ideals.
” If endorsed by Congress , these changes would empower more aggressive anti-monopoly actions far beyond the tech industry , overturning the consumer welfare standard that has guided US antitrust law for 40 years .
“ As they exist today , Apple , Amazon , Google , and Facebook each possess significant @ @ @ @ @ @ @ economy .
In recent years , each company has expanded and exploited their power of the marketplace in anticompetitive ways , ” Judiciary Committee chair Jerrold Nadler ( D-NY ) and antitrust subcommittee head David Cicilline ( D-RI ) said in a statement .
“ Our investigation leaves no doubt that there is a clear and compelling need for Congress and the antitrust enforcement agencies to take action .
”

The House Judiciary Committee has released its conclusions on whether Amazon, Facebook, Apple, and Google are violating antitrust law. Its 449-page report criticizes these companies for buying competitors, preferencing their own services, and holding outsized power over smaller businesses that use their platforms. “Our investigation revealed an alarming pattern of business practices that degrade competition and stifle innovation,” said committee member Val Demings (D-FL). “Competition must reward the best idea, not the biggest corporate account. We will take steps necessary to hold rulebreakers accountable.”
The majority’s report lays out a number of concrete policy recommendations, which, taken together, would drastically change how the tech industry operates. It urges Congress to consider passing commercial nondiscrimination rules that would make large companies offer equal terms to companies selling products and services on their platforms. It recommends barring certain dominant platforms from competing in “adjacent lines of business” where they’d have a huge advantage.
“To put it simply, companies that once were scrappy, underdog startups that challenged the status quo have become the kinds of monopolies we last saw in the era of oil barons and railroad tycoons,” the report says. “By controlling access to markets, these giants can pick winners and losers throughout our economy. They not only wield tremendous power, but they also abuse it by charging exorbitant fees, imposing oppressive contract terms, and extracting valuable data from the people and businesses that rely on them.”
“Competition must reward the best idea, not the biggest corporate account.”
Most broadly, it suggests that Congress define a new standard for antitrust violations, declaring that the laws should be “designed to protect not just consumers, but also workers, entrepreneurs, independent businesses, open markets, a fair economy, and democratic ideals.”
The report was delayed amid political disagreements in Congress. The New York Times reported that Republicans split with the Democratic majority over proposed solutions to monopolistic behavior and that they were upset the report didn’t discuss claims that tech companies discriminate against conservative users. Rep. Ken Buck (R-CO) circulated an alternative report that described some Democratic proposals as “non-starters for conservatives.” Although there’s bipartisan demand for reducing the power of the biggest tech companies, the committee failed to settle on a single vision of how to move forward.
Buck’s report, titled “The Third Way,” comes to some of the same conclusions. It praises the majority for proposing “additional resources and tools” for antitrust regulatory agencies, including changes to the standard for anticompetitive effects, but it breaks with the primary report on a number of issues, like the nondiscrimination rules. “I agree with about 330 pages of the majority report, that these tech companies have been acting anti-competitively,” Buck told Axios. “It’s very common for Republicans and Democrats to agree on a problem and offer different solutions to solve a problem.”
Platforms face a ‘core conflict of interest’
The majority recommendations could have sweeping consequences for the biggest tech companies. They would restrict which lines of business dominant companies could operate in, potentially severing many of the companies into separate entities. Non-discrimination rules would regulate platforms like Facebook, YouTube, and Amazon more like cable companies and phone networks.
While severe, these actions would prevent tech companies from outflanking competitors on their own platforms — and more importantly, using their privileged position on those platforms to gain an unfair advantage. “By functioning as critical intermediaries that are also integrated across lines of business, the dominant platforms face a core conflict of interest,” the report reads. “The surveillance data they collect through their intermediary role, meanwhile, lets them exploit that conflict with unrivaled precision.”
Lawmakers also recommend a higher bar for acquisition by dominant tech companies, spurred on by the hundreds of acquisitions listed in the report’s appendix. To balance the playing field, the report suggests a shift in presumption for any merger submitted by a major tech company. “Under this change, any acquisition by a dominant platform would be presumed anticompetitive unless the merging parties could show that the transaction was necessary for serving the public interest,” the report reads.
A much higher bar for mergers
Underlying all of it would be more vigorous enforcement of antitrust law, enabled by targeted changes to existing statutes. In particular, the report asks Congress to restate existing antitrust laws, “clarifying that they are designed to protect not just consumers but also workers, entrepreneurs, independent businesses, open markets, a fair economy, and democratic ideals.” If endorsed by Congress, these changes would empower more aggressive anti-monopoly actions far beyond the tech industry, overturning the consumer welfare standard that has guided US antitrust law for 40 years.


theverge--2020-10-06--Netflix is testing a feature that lets you switch off its annoying ‘still watching?’ pop-up

Netflix is testing a feature that I am referring to as a “ sick day function ” — an option to turn off that pesky pop-up that appears after watching three episodes in a row of something to ask if you ’ re still watching .
The new feature looks like it ’ s been in testing for a while in certain regions , and a Netflix spokesperson confirmed to The Verge today that the feature is still in testing mode .
Over the recent weeks , however , excitement over the feature has hit Twitter and TikTok .
It @ @ @ @ @ @ @ asks if you ’ re still watching or if you want to “ play without asking again.
” Hypothetically , if you ’ re in the middle of rewatching Supernatural and don ’ t want Netflix to interrupt you every three episodes , hitting “ play without asking again ” will allow you to binge to your heart ’ s content .
Look , the “ still watching ?
” feature is , in all practicality , good .
People fall asleep to Netflix , and it ’ s not great for anyone @ @ @ @ @ @ @ our minds , probably — if Netflix is running all night .
At the same time , the “ still watching ?
” question makes my blood boil every time .
It ’ s just ... so condescending , the same way that if I spell something wrong in Google , I don ’ t need to see a sentence in all italics at the top of the page asking , “ Did you mean ?
” If I want to sit on my couch for 12 hours and stream Lucifer or Schitt @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s my business , Netflix .
There ’ s a reason that I ’ ve dubbed this the “ sick day function.
” Picture this : you have a terrible head cold or flu .
The Apple TV remote is lost somewhere because the Apple TV remote is always lost somewhere .
Or maybe you ’ re using a PlayStation or Xbox controller , but it ’ s charging , and it ’ s too far out of reach .
Then , the dreaded “ still watching ?
” message pops up @ @ @ @ @ @ @ exhausted state , all you want to do is yell , “ Yes , you stupid thing , I am still watching !
” ( This is also good for when the next season of Stranger Things comes out , and we ’ re all racing to finish it in one night so Twitter doesn ’ t spoil it for us . )
There are very few product updates that make me go “ thank you !
!
!
, ” but this is indeed one of them .
I hope Netflix rolls @ @ @ @ @ @ @ , ahead of cold and flu season , when we ’ re just going to want to watch New Girl again while sitting on the couch with a runny nose and a box full of tissues .
( Please don ’ t judge my TV choices , we ’ re all just trying our best ... my best just happens to include marathoning Lucifer . )

Netflix is testing a feature that I am referring to as a “sick day function” — an option to turn off that pesky pop-up that appears after watching three episodes in a row of something to ask if you’re still watching.
The new feature looks like it’s been in testing for a while in certain regions, and a Netflix spokesperson confirmed to The Verge today that the feature is still in testing mode. Over the recent weeks, however, excitement over the feature has hit Twitter and TikTok. It is exciting! A box appears that asks if you’re still watching or if you want to “play without asking again.” Hypothetically, if you’re in the middle of rewatching Supernatural and don’t want Netflix to interrupt you every three episodes, hitting “play without asking again” will allow you to binge to your heart’s content.
Look, the “still watching?” feature is, in all practicality, good. People fall asleep to Netflix, and it’s not great for anyone — the environment, our bills, our minds, probably — if Netflix is running all night. At the same time, the “still watching?” question makes my blood boil every time. It’s just... so condescending, the same way that if I spell something wrong in Google, I don’t need to see a sentence in all italics at the top of the page asking, “Did you mean?” If I want to sit on my couch for 12 hours and stream Lucifer or Schitt’s Creek without interruption, that’s my business, Netflix.
There’s a reason that I’ve dubbed this the “sick day function.” Picture this: you have a terrible head cold or flu. The Apple TV remote is lost somewhere because the Apple TV remote is always lost somewhere. Or maybe you’re using a PlayStation or Xbox controller, but it’s charging, and it’s too far out of reach. Then, the dreaded “still watching?” message pops up, and, in your fever-induced, exhausted state, all you want to do is yell, “Yes, you stupid thing, I am still watching!” (This is also good for when the next season of Stranger Things comes out, and we’re all racing to finish it in one night so Twitter doesn’t spoil it for us.)


theverge--2020-10-06--Vizio’s first OLED TVs are now available, and they’re $100 off at Best Buy

At the start of 2020 , Vizio announced it would be joining LG and Sony in the OLED TV ranks , and now the company ’ s first models have begun shipping .
Available in 55- and 65-inch sizes , Vizio ’ s 4K OLED TVs support Dolby Vision HDR and include both Chromecast and Apple AirPlay functionality built in .
The Vizio OLEDs also offer 4K gaming with variable refresh rates up to 120Hz — a key factor as shoppers eye potential TV upgrades for the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5 .
They ’ ve got HDMI 2.1 @ @ @ @ @ @ @ with the usual OLED perks like perfect blacks , excellent contrast , and great viewing angles .
Vizio is also trying to be aggressive on price as it takes on LG and Sony .
It has priced the 55-inch OLED at $ 1,299.99 and the 65-inch at $ 1,999.99 .
But right out of the gate , Best Buy is taking $ 100 off the cost of either model .
For comparison , LG ’ s CX-series OLED runs $ 1,799.99 but has already been on sale .
( Best Buy currently has @ @ @ @ @ @ @ ’ s OLED sets are priced even higher .
I haven ’ t had the opportunity to review Vizio ’ s OLED yet , but I ’ m looking forward to seeing how the company ’ s first effort fares against LG ’ s latest — and the less expensive LCD sets from TCL , Samsung , and others that shoppers might also be considering as we approach the holiday season .
One area where LG has an advantage is if you ’ re looking for a smaller size ; this year it @ @ @ @ @ @ @ can double as a TV and PC gaming display .

At the start of 2020, Vizio announced it would be joining LG and Sony in the OLED TV ranks, and now the company’s first models have begun shipping. Available in 55- and 65-inch sizes, Vizio’s 4K OLED TVs support Dolby Vision HDR and include both Chromecast and Apple AirPlay functionality built in.
The Vizio OLEDs also offer 4K gaming with variable refresh rates up to 120Hz — a key factor as shoppers eye potential TV upgrades for the Xbox Series X and PlayStation 5. They’ve got HDMI 2.1 connectivity (with eARC) and come with the usual OLED perks like perfect blacks, excellent contrast, and great viewing angles.
Vizio is also trying to be aggressive on price as it takes on LG and Sony. It has priced the 55-inch OLED at $1,299.99 and the 65-inch at $1,999.99. But right out of the gate, Best Buy is taking $100 off the cost of either model. For comparison, LG’s CX-series OLED runs $1,799.99 but has already been on sale. (Best Buy currently has it for $1,599.99.) Sony’s OLED sets are priced even higher.