No, Section 230 protects TikTok as a platform. He would have to sue the ad creator.
Ullallulloo
You're saying that the solution would be to hold TikTok liable in this case for failing to prevent fraud on its platform? In that case, we wouldn't even really need a new law. Mostly just repealing or adding exceptions to Section 230 would make platforms responsible. That's not a new solution though. People have been pushing for that for years.
The article says there were no signs of breaking in, so it is strongly implied that it was someone he was close to.
That's not planned obsolescence. Making lithium batteries that survive thousands of charges is just really, really hard. Physics only allows them to last so long. Five years is pretty good for a phone. Frankly, I think making a rechargeable battery that lasts all day and lasts 10 years in a passively-cooled phone is just impossible with our current technology.
Radio waves are on the other end of the electromagnetic spectrum from cancer-causing light. It's very well settled that radio waves cannot cause cancer.
Has there been any cause of RF leading to burns or fever? The idea that a cell phone could transfer enough energy to make even the slightest difference seems insane to me. I can't imagine it's physically possible for the health risk to be any worse than raising your thermostat by 1° would be.
This seems like nothing more than pandering to psuedoscientific quakery.
I did: ($15 × 13 × 18) ÷ (69000000 ÷ 40000) = $2.03
95% of McDonald's are franchised. Virtually all of the people you will ever see at a McDonald's really work for "John Doe's Eastern McDonald's Franchises #2 LLC" and are therefore not counted.
Anything the government produces should be in the public domain.
Each post refers to the poster's home domain as the canonical URL, regardless of which instance you're viewing it on specifically to avoid duplication SEO concerns