Internet providers in the United States must display clear pricing and product information. Controversies surrounding HP Ink continue to tarnish the company's reputation among consumers. Is EU competition law working? Early numbers seem to point to that possibility. And there's a $10 million bet that Elon Musk is wrong about AI.
Find out all this and more on the “All bets are off” edition of Hashtag Trends. I'm your host, Jim Love. Let's get started.
A new regulation by the Federal Communications Commission went into effect yesterday that requires all broadband internet service providers to clearly display labels detailing prices, speeds, data caps, and other important information about their service plans. was mandated.
The rule aims to help consumers make more informed choices by requiring ISPs to disclose this data in a simple, standardized format similar to food nutrition labels. That's what I mean.
In addition to the fees charged, the label also lists other plan limitations, such as monthly data caps and overages, upfront costs such as equipment rental fees, provider customer service contact information, and throttling policies. need to do it.
Despite this progress, consumer advocacy group Next Century Cities continues to call for more information, saying these broadband “nutrition labels” exaggerate the actual speeds customers can expect or obscure caps and prices. He said that he often does this.
In a conference with the FCC last month, one organization said that in addition to the maximum speed, labels should also include the average speed that users actually experience, because estimates of “typical” speeds are often too optimistic. insisted.
Although comprehensive, some experts have warned that the amount of disclosure required could be overwhelming for smaller ISPs with limited resources compared to industry giants. Masu. Currently, only providers with more than 100,000 subscribers need to comply, and smaller providers have an additional year to comply.
The FCC is currently collecting feedback on the duration and expiration dates of promotional prices and whether to require display of taxes and fees above the base price.
Next Century Cities further advocates for a streamlined complaints process to report issues such as digital discrimination in broadband deployment to the commission.
It is hoped that the introduction of the labeling rules will help customers be better prepared to weigh up broadband and avoid being misled about the true cost and features of different internet packages.
Source: ArsTechica, Engadget, BroadbandBreakfast
Of all the emails I receive regarding articles, HP printer issues are near the top of the list. People are writing to me with their complaints. And it turns out they take these to court as well.
Printer owners are fighting back against HP Inc. in a class action lawsuit over a firmware update that allegedly made their devices unable to use third-party ink cartridges.
In documents filed this week in an Illinois court, the plaintiffs accuse HP of using software changes to monopolize the replacement ink market and “taking advantage of customer sunk costs” for HP printers.
Consumers are claiming that recent firmware updates have prevented their printers from using more affordable third-party cartridges, even though they never agreed to use only HP-branded ink. Masu.
They allege that HP violated several anti-competition laws through this “tie-in scheme,” accomplished through unauthorized software changes whose sole purpose was to deter competing ink suppliers. .
The plaintiffs are seeking damages to cover the cost of the non-HP cartridges, which are now useless, and an injunction to force HP to remove the firmware lockout.
HP, for its part, claims it has made “significant efforts” to inform buyers that its printers are designed to only use HP cartridges that contain security chips.
The company says the update is a legitimate “dynamic security” measure to combat counterfeit ink and does not hide or block remanufactured cartridges that use official HP chips.
HP also argues that if the plaintiffs purchased through intermediaries, they cannot recover damages from manufacturers for overcharging under federal antitrust law.
The controversy highlights long-standing tensions over the high costs of proprietary ink replacements and third-party replacement inks, as printer makers increasingly push subscription models.
A bitter legal battle appears poised to further antagonize HP's customer base over what critics decry as anticompetitive practices to preserve lucrative ink sales.
Source: The Register
We have covered numerous articles on EU laws and regulations that aim to increase customer choice and foster genuine competition. Is it working? In some cases, it appears to have had an impact.
Some alternative web browsers have been found to be reporting an increase in user interest and downloads within the European Union following the recent implementation of new digital regulations called the Digital Markets Act (DMA). .
The landmark rule, which went into effect last month, requires powerful technology gatekeepers like Apple and Google to offer mobile users a choice screen that displays alternative browsers or other core apps.
The goal is to shake up the competition from pre-installed defaults and make users more aware of options beyond Safari on iOS and Chrome on Android.
Although still in its early stages, several smaller browser makers are already sharing positive indicators of growing attention from EU users.
Norway's Opera said new user growth increased by 63% from February to late March. Meanwhile, the same Norwegian browser Vivaldi reports that the number of downloads in the EU increased by 36.7%, and in the eight countries shown on Apple's selection screen he reached nearly 70%.
The privacy-focused Brave browser also noted that the number of daily iOS installs in the EU has doubled compared to the pre-selection screen level.
And lesser-known rival Aloha, based in Cyprus, claims a 250% increase in new users as it moves from fourth to second place in the EU market.
However, not all alternative browsers have yet shown clear benefits. Veteran players such as Mozilla's Firefox, DuckDuckGo, and Ecosia say it's too early to accurately assess the impact of DMA as the selection screen rollout is still in progress, but those browsers have been successful. Some argue that they are deliberately withholding success reports because they want to maintain pressure on . Choices become clearer and easier to adopt.
For example, there are complaints that Apple's iOS implementation in particular has serious design flaws that prevent users from making meaningful choices when switching browsers.
The European Commission has launched an investigation into alleged cases of inadequate compliance by the tech giant, including Apple's selection screen approach.
Given continued pressure from the largest alternative browsers and the EU's track record, we will be watching closely to see whether powerful gatekeepers are truly opening up their platforms to increased competition and consumer choice as intended. There is a high possibility that you will.
Source: TechCrunch
Some tech industry CEOs are putting their money behind skepticism about Elon Musk's ambitious prediction that artificial intelligence will surpass human intelligence in the next few years.
In a recent interview, the billionaire claimed that AI will likely exceed the cognitive capabilities of a single human by the end of 2024, and that AI as a whole will exceed the combined intelligence of all humans within just five years. did.
But such bold predictions are raising eyebrows and raising high stakes from some AI experts who see Musk's timeline as highly unrealistic.
Gary Marcus, CEO of machine learning startup Geometric Intelligence, has publicly offered $1 million to anyone who can prove him wrong, including Musk.
In response, ingk.com CEO Damion Hankesi raised the stakes even further, saying he would take on $10 million to bet whether Musk's AI predictions would come true. .
Marcus said Musk has not yet accepted the multimillion-dollar challenge, but Tesla's CEO has previously said that artificial general intelligence is not actually imminent, as Musk claimed. He added that he had ignored a small bet of $100,000.
For Marcus, betting is about more than just money. He hoped to spark a public debate with Musk about what artificial intelligence could realistically accomplish in the short term, contrasting it with the almost utopian promises that have become commonplace from technology leaders. There is.
Marcus argued that many in the industry have a track record of making scientifically implausible claims and failing to meet self-imposed deadlines, citing the continued challenges of self-driving cars as an example. Ta.
Although large-scale language models are progressing rapidly, Marcus argues that the idea that we could surpass human-level general intelligence within just a few years is fanciful, and that milestone is still within reach. We estimate that it may be ten years from now.
As CEOs literally place bets on contrasting AI prospects, the high-stakes bet is that too much hype is obscuring the actual status and timeline of artificial intelligence development. This highlights the intensification of the debate.
I don't know. This will only happen once, only once. I'm betting Elon is right.
As always, we'd love to hear your thoughts.
And that’s today’s show…
Thank you to everyone who wrote comments, including those who wrote to me about the trials and tribulations of purchasing HP printers and ink.
Please continue. Please do not forget. You can now find us on YouTube. If you check us out, please like and subscribe. We hope to grow our audience there as well.
I'm your host, Jim Love. Have a wonderful Friday!
