If your defense is "everyone does it", then why do we even have laws and rules?

This, and this is why private equity firms are a negative to capitalism.

BS, there are mature options out there. Nutanix is where we went, and we enhanced a lot of our policies and platforms because of it.
It was a net benefit for us to move off VMWare and not pay them a cent of extortion money to do so.
So Im not sure where you get these broad ideas or statements, but they are BS.

As they keep increasing the cost of their licenses and not adding anything of value to their platform, the exodus will continue.
Broadcom bought VMWare for the patents. They dont care about the software. Broadcom has had a history of this, so this isnt a new or surprising thing.

Son, you would take 10k.... you already sold out
And its clear you have no idea the harm being done to locals.
Wonder why they havent put a data center next to you yet.

Oh yeah? How is googles "do no harm" going?
This is just corporate speak for "please dont regulate us", which we absolutely should.

Yeah, the statement is a fallacy to perpetuate a narrative that we should all be dependent on Oligarchs instead.
If we arent careful, our life will be subscription run.

Making claims without valid data.
Truth is, there is a concerted push to be dependent on tech bros technology, including thumbing the scale on economy and things like Vehicle insurance.
https://blogs.lse.ac.uk/usappblog/2026/05/14/how-oligarchs-dominate-our-democracies-and-preserve-inequality/
https://www.oxfamamerica.org/explore/issues/economic-justice/is-the-us-witnessing-the-rise-of-oligarchy/

Let me remind you Insurance companies are for profit. If they want to keep their job, they will not price themselves outside of the market.
https://www.investopedia.com/ask/answers/052015/what-main-business-model-insurance-companies.asp

It took us 100 years after the first electric vehicle, so based off of that vaguely relative point... 100 years?

they is contextually related to who is abusing the system to cause the uproar.
Which would be the LEOs

No one said flock was violating, although one could deem its controls insufficient to track abuse and sue based on that.
The argument was the police use, not flock itself.
Now if flock is insecure (which it is), then it is also liable for leaks and manipulation of facts. The chain of custody is broken by default.

So why are you asking the question?
You dont want to learn, you just want to waste time.

I already stated the 14th amendment.
Go read SCOTUS rulings and stop throwing around baseless BS on a website.
Do something good with your time.

Then you never checked.

14th amendment and 4th amendment.