Why exactly are they targeting a non-governing member of the alliance?

yeah, the mid-ventral butt opening

You have to soak them in the soda then suck out the flavor like a popsicle stick.

Who doesn’t want to stab themselves in the roof of the mouth while trying to eat their breakfast soda?

I’m about to blow OPs mind.

There’s a third option -

Hydrate!

Required to use smart features? Thank you Walmart for encouraging people not to connect their TVs to the internet!

I wasn’t aware that boner control was a skill. TIL.

lmfao. apparently the way this was originally written would have prevented non-exempt routers from getting security updates. you know, the alleged reason this ruling even exists. somebody at the FCC office of engineering and technology must have noticed because they issued a temporary waiver (PDF file).

Applying the revised 47 CFR §§ 2.932(b) and 2.1043(b) to the newly added Covered Routers would have the effect of prohibiting permissive changes to Covered Routers even if they were authorized prior to the March 23, 2026, Covered List addition. This prohibition would be in effect even for Class I permissive changes—such as software and firmware security updates that mitigate harm to U.S. consumers—because previously-authorized Routers are now covered equipment. … Therefore, OET concludes that a limited waiver until March 1, 2027, is warranted and in the public interest. March 1, 2027, is convenient because it is the date until which the recent DoW determination excepts certain otherwise Covered Routers. Prior to March 1, 2027, the OET will re-evaluate whether to further extend applicability.

They wouldn’t be forwarding packets between networked systems unless you’re using one as a hotspot. And even then I don’t know if the term “networked systems” would include a single computer or if they intend it to mean an area network of some kind.

They’re always rentals though, correct? It’ll be interesting to see which way it swings, for sure. Stupid stupid rule either way.

Taking a huge payment from Comcast and Verizon would be my guess. The language appears to exclude ISP-owned routers.

It would be funny if, like, the UniFi line got banned but the EdgeOS line didn’t just based on target audience

I’m thinking exempt based on the FCC language of “designed to be installed by the consumer”. ISP provided routers are usually hooked up by the installer tech. Which makes me wonder which ISP chortled orange man’s balls to get this passed.

It would seem to exclude ISP provided routers =/

Based on the language, it would seem to exclude ISP provided routers as those are not “designed to be installed by the consumer”. It also excludes anything not SoHo.

I’m thinking exempt based on the FCC language of “designed to be installed by the consumer”. ISP provided routers are usually hooked up by the installer tech. Which makes me wonder which ISP chortled orange man’s balls to get this passed.

the only thing i did was tell one commenter to fuck off lol. some people i swear

bro, i was saying that the rules allow jokes. jfc. downer was the person saying to take the jokes back to reddit.

from what i undertand, everyone else is making jokes and enjoying them while one person has to be a debbie downer