Shitty company that keeps putting out worse and worse products, buying another company that has gotten worse over time.
Yup, this tracks. And people will still buy both of their shit.
this post was submitted on 23 May 2025
22 points (92.3% liked)
Technology
7341 readers
269 users here now
News community around technology, social media platforms, information technology and governmental policy surrounding it.
What doesn't fit here?
The core of the story has to be technology focused.
- If article mentions "AI" in a sentence and then talks about business economics that doesn't make it tech news.
- Gaming is too many layers removed from technology. There are many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Transporation is too many layers removed from technology. EVs while use many cool technologies have many dedicated communities that are a better fit for it.
- Entertainment is too many layers removed from technology. While sometimes it can fit here, business or cultural aspects of it are a better fit for dedicated communities.
- Cybersecurity. While it heavily focuses on technology, most of the time it's too technical for most people who are not already invested in it. Should be posted in a dedicated communities unless it has broader connection to other tech areas.
Post guidelines
Title format
Post title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL format
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefix
Opinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefix
Country prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.
Rules
1. English only
Title and associated content has to be in English.
2. Use original link
Post URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
3. Respectful communication
All communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. Inclusivity
Everyone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation.
5. Ad hominem attacks
Any kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangents
Stay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may apply
If something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.
Companion communities
!globalnews@lemmy.zip
!interestingshare@lemmy.zip
Icon attribution | Banner attribution
If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
😆 This reads like they're choosing to drop it because they want to focus on other things, when the reality is that just the other day they lost their appeal to have it blocked (after their original court loss to have it blocked, this was them also losing the appeal) lol.
The FTC’s appeal to block Microsoft’s $69 billion deal to acquire the company behind Call of Duty was denied by San Francisco’s 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals today, further cementing a purchase that was originally announced in late 2022 (via Reuters). It was a move decided by a three-judge panel that brought an end to the FTC’s questioning of the July 2023 decision to allow Microsoft to finalize its purchase.
Lina Khan turned the FTC into an absolute joke, and they're going to have a hard time undoing all the damage she did. They never should have even attempted to block this acquisition. The FTCs entire argument was "yeah sure they'll still be coming last in the market, but they'll have a monopoly somehow" lol. Realistically what they were trying to do was just tie it up in court as long as possible, hoping that the EU would block it. When the EU didn't block it, the FTC went into panic mode because they had no case. They were made to look amateur in court, and they were lambasted by the judges for the waste of time and lack of reasons for the court case.
The FTC hoped that the EU would block the deal, and then the FTC would look like they won as well. Instead they were made to look stupid in court.