After correcting for how many of those are cellphone users, then correcting for how many of those are android users, then correcting for how many of those are the plan owners, it would be considerably more.
…until you correct for the lawyers fee, then it goes back to $22.47
I probably should have clarified that the 14m number was the estimated number of Californian residents that have Android phones as per the article, but my comment was moreso me overanalysing a joke.
According to the case website, it looks like it’s only people who own a device made by Google that runs their voice assistant. So, Samsung Android users are not included, but anyone with a Google Home device or a Chromecast is included
Even if it were split evenly across the estimated 14m residents, it only comes to a grand total of $22.47
After correcting for how many of those are cellphone users, then correcting for how many of those are android users, then correcting for how many of those are the plan owners, it would be considerably more.
…until you correct for the lawyers fee, then it goes back to $22.47
I probably should have clarified that the 14m number was the estimated number of Californian residents that have Android phones as per the article, but my comment was moreso me overanalysing a joke.
Ah, my mistake
According to the case website, it looks like it’s only people who own a device made by Google that runs their voice assistant. So, Samsung Android users are not included, but anyone with a Google Home device or a Chromecast is included
Lawyers own the best middleman injection strategy in history.
Eh, half of them are probably iPhone users. I’m boutta be a $40aire baby!
Go BIG! Or go home.