The company's Meta One plans range from $2.99/month to $499/month.
This report is indexed by BAGANBAZAR GRAPH with its original publisher named and linked for readers.
Read at original outlet ↗
BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsTECHNOLOGY deskEarth’s quantum field and signals from other satellites may prove more reliable
BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsTECHNOLOGY deskThe gap between technology and policymaking has gotten wider than ever with artificial intelligence, leaving a global policy vacuum as A.I. models rapidly advance.
BAGANBAZAR GRAPHSource-attributed newsTECHNOLOGY deskThe 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincinnati ruled on Friday that Ohio and Tennessee can regulate Kalshi‘s event contracts under their state gambling laws, handing the prediction-market operator a loss in its fight to keep the industry under exclusive federal oversight. The decision vacated a preliminary injunction a Tennessee federal judge had issued against enforcement of that state’s gambling statutes, and separately upheld an Ohio federal judge’s denial of a similar injunction. Writing for a unanimous three-judge panel, Circuit Judge Julia Smith Gibbons said Kalshi failed to show that its sports event contracts qualify as swaps subject to exclusive CFTC oversight, and held that the Commodity Exchange Act does not preempt either state’s gambling laws. Kalshi spokesperson Dani Lever pushed back on the outcome, arguing the ruling exposes the flaw in letting states set their own rules. “The ruling shows exactly why a state-by-state patchwork doesn’t work,” Lever said. “Markets can’t operate when the rules change at every state line, which is why Congress created a single federal regulator with nationwide rules.” A Widening Circuit Split Friday’s ruling adds a third data point to an increasingly fractured appellate landscape. Last month, the 9th Circuit found that Kalshi’s contracts fall under Nevada’s gambling laws, while the 3rd Circuit reached the opposite conclusion in April, ruling that Kalshi’s contracts are not subject to New Jersey’s gambling statutes. New Jersey has since asked the Supreme Court to overturn that 3rd Circuit decision, and the 6th Circuit’s contrary outcome in Ohio and Tennessee only strengthens the case for the justices to step in and resolve which framework governs nationwide. Gibbons framed the legal distinction sharply, writing that swa