|
Apple finally refreshed the iPad Pro, and the new feature set was worth the wait. From new OLED display technology to the M4 chip, the 2024 iPad Pro is undeniably impressive. We've rounded up some of the most notable changes worth considering when deciding rather to upgrade.
|
|
 TikTok parent company ByteDance today filed a lawsuit against the U.S. government in an effort to put a stop to the bill requiring TikTok to be sold off to a non-Chinese company in a matter of months, or face a U.S. ban.
|
|
 An hour-long interactive and immersive Disney story is coming to the Apple Vision Pro in the near future, according to an announcement from Marvel Studios. The Disney original is connected to the "What If…? animated series and it will be released as a new app for the Vision Pro.
|
|
FTX has filed a plan with a bankruptcy court to pay back creditors who held cryptocurrency at the embattled exchange. The vast majority of customers are set to get their money back with interest, though they (and the debtors) missed out on major gains in the crypto market since FTX's dramatic collapse in November 2022 — the price of Bitcoin has more than tripled since then.
FTX aims to fully pay back non-governmental creditors based on the value of their claims as determined by the bankruptcy court. That means 98 percent of creditors (those who have up to $50,000 in claims) will get 118 percent of the amount of their allowed claims. Other creditors will get their money back, plus what FTX describes as billions of dollars in compensation "for the time value of their investments."
Government creditors are in line for payouts with a nine percent interest rate. The Internal Revenue Service and Department of Justice are among the stakeholders with which FTX has agreed settlements.
The company suggests that, if its plan of reorganization is rubber stamped, it would be able to resolve disputes with private and government stakeholders "without costly and protracted litigation." All told, FTX says that it will be able to distribute between $14.5 billion and $16.3 billion in cash.
But, you may be wondering, where exactly is all this money coming from? After all, when FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection 17 months ago, it held just 0.1 percent of the Bitcoin and 1.2 percent of the Ethereum that its customers thought it had.
FT
|
|
If you're a MacOS user, your virtual private network should be as smart as your machine. Here are the VPNs we recommend based on our latest testing.
|
|
Epic Games won its antitrust lawsuit against Google in December when a federal jury found that the latter violated US antitrust laws with regards to how it runs the Play Store. A few months later, the gaming developer submitted its list of demands, which if implemented will blow the Play Store wide open. Now, Google has filed an injunction telling the court that no, it will not give Epic what it wants without a fight, because the company's asks "stray far beyond the trial record."
The remedies Epic had submitted would require the court not just to create a global regulatory regime to set prices for apps, Google wrote in the filing as seen by Engadget, but also to micromanage "a highly complex and dynamic ecosystem" used by billions of consumers and app developers around the world. If you'll recall, Epic wants Google to open up Android to third-party app stores and to make its catalog of apps available to those stores. It also wants restrictions on pre-installed apps to be outlawed and to prohibit any Google activity that incentivizes third-parties.
Google said that bowing down to all those demands would "effectively prevent [it] from competing," which in turn would negatively affect Android users and developers. Epic's proposals only benefit Epic, Google said in its filing, and will harm other developers by depriving them of control over where their app is distributed. Manufacturers will no longer be able to take advantage of the partnerships Google typically offers, while users have to deal with additional security and privacy risks.
The company also slammed Epic over the "vagueness" of its proposed injunction, which would require
|
|
