Slashdot Mirror
French Court Frowns On Autocomplete, Tells Google To Remove Searches
New submitter Lexx Greatrex writes with this excerpt from Ars Technica: "Google had been sued by insurance company Lyonnaise de Garantie, which was offended by search results including the word 'escroc,' meaning crook, according to a story posted Tuesday by the Courthouse News Service. 'Google had argued that it was not liable since the word, added under Google Suggest, was the result of an automatic algorithm and did not come from human thought,' the article states. 'A Paris court ruled against Google, however, pointing out that the search engine ignored requests to remove the offending word... In addition to the fine, Google must also remove the term from searches associated with Lyonnaise de Garantie.'"
Can it be added back in later if we find out that they really are crooks?
Corporate origin. Government sponsorship. Plain and simple.
...many other here will say it, but what would the French Court say if Google simply removed Lyonnaise de Garantie's website from *all* their results....
Every time someone rolls out something horrible like this they think it's a wunnerful thing. Well, not tal all of us. I find this stuff causes me to make typos far more often in searches, because of the distraction.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
Show some balls google.
Disable everything that is google in France for 1 day and blame it on the court. In 3-6 weeks, when you have a valid fix, silently put that in.
Whenever French users search for "Lyonnaise de Garantie," Google should just return "Your search - Lyonnaise de Garantie - did not match any documents." And then a list of competing insurance companies.
There! Problem solved!
Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)
http://www.lawrenceperson.com/
You want corporate censorship? You got it. Be careful what you wish for.
I have a thought. Google can block France completely...
I don't know whether Lyonnaise de Garantie are crooks, but this is the mother of Streisand effects.
"The agriculture ministry is not in charge of Gundam" - Japanese ministry official.
Crooks, that is? One really has to wonder how many people they had to screw over for this auto-complete suggestion to be show up. That sort of autocomplete result is usually an indication of a fairly large number of people using those words in the same general context. Even now, the sixth suggestion for them ends with problème....
Maybe Google's argument should not have been that Google wasn't responsible, but rather that it's not libel if it is true (I'm assuming that this is the case under French law) or that it is not possible to defame something that is already a disgrace....
More to the point, maybe the company in question should focus more on improving their image by actually improving their customer service instead of just metaphorically wallpapering over the rotting walls. If enough people think they are crooks to cause the Google search results to suggest this for several years in a row, that strongly suggests a very serious problem with the way they do business. I'm not saying that Lyonnaise de Garantie is a bunch of crooks, but they clearly have a serious image problem, and you can't cure that kind of problem by trying to sue people into silence. Doing so can only result in the Streisand Effect.
Check out my sci-fi/humor trilogy at PatriotsBooks.
Now "Lyonnaise de Garantie escroc" is a valid Google term, because I may have heard about this ruling and want to read more about it. So, auto-suggesting as such is highly relevant to me.
Frankly, I like having the suggestions pop up (and not just for the fun factor). There have been times that a suggested result reveals the truth of something when the marketing and SEO have worked to whitewash the search results themselves. When people run into problems with a product, they will search for their problem rather than the marketing speak. I wish I could give my real examples, but I'm contractually/legally obligated not to. I'll contrive a working one instead (though the contrived one is not as solid as my real examples...).
Contrived example: Pop the words "MS Antivirus" into google search. "MS Antivirus" is a name of a piece of malware posing as security software. For me, the third suggested search is "MS Antivirus malware". Without having that there, the search results for "MS Antivirus" that declare it as malware are all below the fold. The results for "MS Antivirus malware" have the wikipedia entry for the malware itself as the first result.
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
1. Do enough bad things that people in your country start adding their word for "crook" to searches with your trademark
2. Sue Google instead of fixing your reputation problem
3. ?????
4. Profit!
That includes searches like "crook Lyonnaise de Garantie" and "is Lyonnaise de Garantie a crook?".
I'm rather curious to see what Google does.
If that company just ignored it, no one would care. But filing a lawsuit has brought it to the attention of the internets. They are probably going to experience what I call the Santorum effect.
Are Lyonnaise de Garantie escroc?
I don't know whether Lyonnaise de Garantie are crooks, but I do know that they tried to censor the web to remove any association between Lyonnaise de Garantie and crooks, or as the French say, Lyonnaise de Garantie and escroc. Which is interesting. I wonder what Ms Streisand in her lovely beach house has to say about it all.
So Lyonnaise de Garantie's website no longer shows up on searches for escroc. But I bet a fortune that "Lyonnaise de Garantie sues to stop being called escrocs" news reports will soon be one of the top search results for "escroc".
After all, I doubt the ruling covers news stories written, published and hosted by third parties.
If you're on Facebook, post a new status message "Lyonnaise de Garantie escroc" - be sure it's flagged "Public" rather than "Friends only" or whatever. Tweet it too, if you're so inclined.
#DeleteChrome
The search engine project pushed by the French government?
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
Just sent some spam via http://www.lyonnaise-de-garantie.com/contact.php
Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC Lyonnaise de Garanti ESCROC
No, not like that.*
*Well, maybe.
Posterity, my posterior.
By the way, I forgot to mention this in the last post, but Samuel Miller, the DOJ prosecutor who went after Microsoft also considers them a monopoly. So your statement about Microsoft is somewhat amusing in restrospect.
"Sufferin' succotash."
Great Zappa quote for you: "There is no hell... There is only... France."
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
To prevent escrocs, crook, idiot, fool, and any other negative comment from completing "Lyonnaise de Garantie", Google should remove "Lyonnaise de Garantie" from its autocompleter.
Google most definitely has a monopoly in web advertising...it's why they're being investigated in Europe for antitrust. The DOJ lead who went after Microsoft ten years ago considers Google a monopoly, and Eric Schmidt told the U.S. Senate that Google was "in the area" of being a monopoly. I think there's so much resistance to admitting it on Slashdot because "monopoly!" was an anti-Microsoft rallying cry for so many years, and to put Google in the same boat kind of stings a little.
I have to say, though, that watching the moderators attack anyone who even dares utter the words "monopoly" and "Google" in the same sentence is both amusing and sad. How many ongoing investigations are there of Google right now, particularly in Europe? I mean, come on. It's not trolling to point out that Google is friggin' huge.
in 3, 2, 1...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
They really need to get a life. If Google offends you then DON'T USE GOOGLE. No one is forcing you.
Is this really what this world is turning into? A bunch of whiny pansies.
---- Booth was a patriot ----
Sounds like a limitation of Google's ranking algorithm to me. Shouldn't they fix the ranking, rather than rely on an extral UI layer (aka "suggested search", that may or may not be turned on for a user)?
If you notice incorrect rankings, you should probably report them to Google, so they can tweak the signal weights.
Lyonnaise de Garantie is the problem here, not the French government. Sure, this is a bad ruling, but that happens all the time in court systems. Simply put, they are trying to litigate away someone's opinion of them. I find this sort of behavior to be the most base form of bullying, and I feel obligated to contribute to the 'Streisand Effect'...
In my opinion, the French firm Lyonnaise de Garantie to a man, are worse than crooks. They are the most foul and debase degenerates, slime of the lowest order. Fuck them, they are pox on the world and a waste of air. To call them a pack of worthless cunts would bring shame to roving packs of worthless cunts. Jean-Luc Berho, the VP of the company cannot bring himself to orgasm without unless he chokes a dog to death. Jean-Jacques Olivié, the president of that slithering pack of reptilians, cannot be trusted not to accidentally choke himself to death if left unattended with a stale croissant. May he catch syphilis from a drunken Armenian mule. Insurance frauds could learn something from these thieves, as could lamprey and other tubular blood sucking vermin.
But, hey, I could be wrong. After all, it is just an opinion.
HA! I just wasted some of your bandwidth with a frivolous sig!
I was going to suggest something similar: remove their physical footprint from that bizarre regime's jurisdiction & put a 'Sorry' page up in place of Google.fr. (French users could go to another French-language-centric Google incarnation, and Google could still index France-specific results from elsewhere.)
Pi Ran Out
Now that they decided to sue because of this and the word "escroc" is posted on so many pages on the Internet along with "Lyonnaise de Garantie," it is now absolutely VALID to have a search of "escroc" return "Lyonnaise de Garantie."
So, though their argument WAS valid beforehand, it's ridiculous to force them to remove results now because their own actions made the search result into a valid one...
Also, perhaps they should look into their business practices? Maybe there's a reason that word came up with their company? The phrase "me thinks thou doth protest too much" comes to mind.
P.S. - I know that quote above is one that started out as a misquote and then its misquote ended up being famous even though it's an error...it's the misquote that's valid for these purposes, though...
They are two different things. The suggest search is accumulated from the phrases people search with. The results are governed by the search rankings.
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
...posting to remove a misapplied moderation. How about either (a) an undo option or (b) a moderation widget that's robust against bumped elbows, Slashdot?
Google was also fined money (the linked article didn't specify if the money was paid to the plaintiffs or just to the French courts). I wonder if Google pointed out in their briefs that the French courts taking this action would more or less make it impractical, from a business point of view, for Google (or any other search provider, for that matter) to ever return unflattering results from any search. Why?
Are Europeans on the eve of a new, wonderfully utopian view of the net? One wonders what a search for "Greece debt" would look like. Probably the first entry would be about ponies.
Have gnu, will travel.
Please don't propegate "blog speak".
Below the fold... after the break...
It was called communism, and it failed miserably. That expectation of receiving money for your work was changed for, go work or else.
Yes, and the search ranking is supposed to rank by relevance. So if the 3rd result is the most relevant, then the search ranking is incorrect and should be fixed.
I see what you're saying. You're thinking of combating the SEO results. That is an ongoing battle that I don't think will ever truly be won. I've seen both sides of it. An ugly, escallating, no-valid-results land of despair and buzzwords...
US Democracy:The best person for the job (among These pre-selected choices...)
The difference is that committing a murder is illegal, but reporting that "escroc" is commonly associated with "Lyonnaise de Garantie" is not. If someone said Lyonnaise de Garantie is a crook, and if that person was wrong, then Lyonnaise de Garantie should be going after that person.
It's getting pretty tenuous to dismiss communism as "failed", based on the relative "success" of capitalism at this point. But I don't think ShieldW0lf was talking about communism at all. Collective ownership and organization does not require centralized control. Capitalism is a form of distributed ownership and organization with efficient distribution of resources provided by a bit of Game Theory. Or that is the idea anyway.
The whole point of Game Theory is to structure the rules of the game to encourage the behavior your want and discourage the behavior you don't. We do this at a economy-level game with regulation. The current rules encourage exploitation - "You get used and cheated and swindled because it's the only way to get you off your fucking asses." - but this can be fixed without resorting to communism.
No, because it's a different search. I'm sure there are plenty of people that search 'MS Antivirus' because they're looking for an AV program or because they're looking for the AV software that Microsoft makes, but they don't know its name.
'MS Antivirus Malware' might not be searched nearly as often, but it is a string that occurs more enough, so its added as a suggestion, the same is likely true for strings like 'MS Antivirus name' or 'MS Antivirus recommendations'
I would delist them entirely.
If you have a problem with how we rank our searches, we can remove you entirely.
LK
"Hi. This is my friend, Jack Shit, and you don't know him." - Lord Kano
You do understand those were used before blogs nor are they exclusive to blogs? You may be shocked to discover things like pages, bookmarks, wallpaper held meaning before you discovered blogs as well. How is it working out telling people to do things on the internet?
Man blir trött av att gå och göra ingenting.
It was called communism, and it failed miserably. That expectation of receiving money for your work was changed for, go work or else.
"There is talk about the failure of socialism, yet where is the success of capitalism in Africa, Asia, and Latin America? Where is the success of capitalism in places where thousands of millions of people live? I believe that the failure of capitalism should be discussed as much as the failure of socialism in a small number of countries. Capitalism failed in more than 100 countries, which now face a truly desperate situation." - Fidel Castro, 1991.
And communism was never tried, not in a large scale. Try to read about its ideas before you make a fool of yourself again, or at least refrain from talking about what you don't understand. And that goes for other topics too, if you have no idea what it is about your uneducated opinion is irrelevant.
Apparently this is a recurring problem for Google. On Sept 27, 2010, a French court convicted Google and Eric Schmidt of criminal defamation (discussion of it and why it wouldn't happen in the U.S. here) for Google's suggest function. The fact that over a year later they're facing this again means (a) they were expecting this to happen and have apparently decided it's part of the cost of doing business in France, and (b) the company suing them has many lawyers who were surely aware of this and saw a neat way to make some money and censor negative opinions.
Google should just switch it all off and display a message, "Autocomplete is disabled in France because your judges are retards."
Table-ized A.I.
If I ran Google I'd blacklist said company. No results for them period, on any search. I'd say "To make sure we comply with the order that no offensive terms ever lead to you, we have removed you from our indexing entirely. This is the only way we can ensure that there is never an offensive term that might result in your company being linked."
They'd quickly find out it is not good for business when you can't be located by the most popular search engine. If they wanted back on I'd demand they sign an indemnity/permission document saying that they agree never to sue us no matter what search terms may end up linking to them.
As far as I can make out, this case is making at least some headlines in France too, and the general sentiment is outrage at the company and at the court system, very similar to here. See these:
link 1
link 2
link3
However, more interestingly, the last link points to some other case where the judgment went the other way, i.e. Google suggesting a derogatory term in their search suggestions, and the French court finding them innocent. The text in French is here (use google translate !) and shows much more common sense.
Interestingly, I do not recall seeing this well-reasoned judgment on the front page of Slashdot, much in the way of traditional news outlets not reporting good news as often as bad ones.
Ah - the perpetual lament of the blind idealist.
"It will work next time, honest"
Santanyana hit the nail on the head when he said:
Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim.
... It's an insurance company, for Missael's sake. They're not just crooks, they're petty thieves, drug dealers, human traffickers, child molesters and they are mean to little ponies. I bet they also furiously masturbate to kiddie scat bestiality porn while yelling "je me rende! je me rende! vive la France! escargot tour eiffel café merde rien ne va plus!"
Geeks are so full of shit that "beating the crap out of them" takes a whole new meaning.
They so understand the internets.
Now, this is interesting: the number of searches for "Lyonnaise de Garantie escroc" has been increasing since December 27. I wonder what happened that day.
I am not opposed to insurance as a concept - but it will only work with strong state regulation to contain its excesses.
Obviously I do not live in America, where exploiting the weak is considered a virtuous act and to be applauded, especially if it makes you rich. Most bizarely, this belief seems to be as strong in the exploited as in everyone else..
Here in Europe, most people know (often from the experience of close family) that, while they, personally, may be strong now, they could easily be weak tomorrow. Those that don't believe this were given too free a rein lately - and now we are in a mess.
Sent from my ASR33 using ASCII
This is not about single court decisions.
This is a stupid court decisions because next in line are politicians who complain about being called liars by Google Suggest, scammers who complain about being called scammers, churches who refuse being called looney, etc.
You end up with a huge index of forbidden word combinations, which affect negatively the performance of Google Suggest and are a pain to maintain. Next thing, someone will probbaly claim that Google should have placed them proactively on that list, and ask for damages.
I would support the idea of delisting such companies completely, but crooks and escroc's like the Lyonnaise de Garantie would then sue to be listed again.
Hey don't blame me, IANAB
And what if Google added the phrase on purpose? Freedom of opinion is protected in most cultured countries. Does this mean French restaurants can now sue Michelin for a negative review?
Geeks worldwide seem to manage two steps forward for every step "forward" that governments make. Hopefully the trend will continue. https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/mafiaafire-gee-no-evil/
This Firefox addon re-enables censored "suggestion" content from Google.
It's a great plugin, but I'm curious as to how it actually works.
Wow, there wasn't communism, nor socialism in any sense in 20th century (ok, maybe in Israel farms like small microcosms). Please stop spread this myth. Also before that get to know a USSR history a little. It was a bloody mess at the beginning, but no one denies, that there was several socialist things that worked in late 20th century. Unfortunately, we are happily to jump on conclusions on black and white very soon.
Btw, communism and socialism differs a little bit. Communism was planned a very special way as "socialism from under" for industrial age and thinking. You know, in the world when countries could decide (not only Communist ones) to kill millions and get away with it. It turned out into bloodbath, but not only innocent blood were spent. Both sides competed for minds and thoughts of the people in the very barbaric way (Russia 1917, read about it man).
For me Communism as Marx ideology is tainted because of bloodshed and unwillingness to listen and reason with opposition of idea (less people, less problem, Stalin un Lenin could have said. In difference, Lenin understood that it can't go on like that forever). *However* I'm very strong socialist and not because have been idealist for most of my life. For very long time in my twenties I thought - well, capitalism isn't that bad if you try to balance it out with doing good while trying to survive in these jungles. But in the end I understood that those with power and money grabbing genes - they just don't listen. I have been direct contact with some of them in my country. Some of them would like to get out of this game, but can't.
Thriving on primitive survival instinct without *understanding* how to handle it - that's what will kill capitalism, like it or not. And with itself humanity, if it won't get it's act together and start to think a new way to live. No one says that it has to be very revolutionary, but we must *evolve* in our thoughts how to survive together. How to handle our primitiveness and same time adaptiveness and willingness to see common goal.
p.s. and please don't mix Stalinism (as Stalin and North Korea) with rest of socialism and Communism. Thank you.
user@ubuntubox:~$ stfu This server is going down for shutdown NOW!
Which is why Credit Unions have gone out of business ;).
Please read Karl Marx - and then study how mutual companies work. Mutual companies, like Credit Unions, are owned by those with share in them (in essence those who are insured own the company). They still make a profit, but it is distributed back to the shareholders - the insured. In addition, the management does not have a conflict of interest - to work for their customers by minimizing their costs and to work for their shareholders. Instead the interests of the customers and the shareholders are aligned by making them one and the same.
"There is talk about the failure of socialism, yet where is the success of capitalism in Africa, Asia, and Latin America?"
He was correct, if you didn't count Japan, Singapore, Mexico, Argentina, Hong Kong or South Korea, which is a round-about way of saying that he was wrong. True, Africa south of Sahara isn't doing great, but that doesn't seem to correlate with economic model, and has more to do with the lack of infrastructure and protection of property rights. But then, quoting a communist despot on the success of capitalism is like quoting a catholic priest on the succes of the gay right movement: Unless you are doing it to ridicule the quotee, you are not doing your argument or your credibilty any favors.
You left out USA with 50% of people now either poor or in poverty (50 million in poverty).
Waterfox - a Firefox fork with legacy extension support, security updates and better privacy by default.
Capitalism didn't fail. Democracy did. And a particular implementation of it, it is probably not an inherent failure.
If the US and EU are experiencing that depression it is because of government fraud. And that isn't a feature of Capitalism.
Worldwide people should start rethinking their government.
Rethinking email
Latin America has Chile, that become rich applying the neoliberal agenda with a small dose of criticism.
Rethinking email
That's because real communism fails long before a situation can ever get to a "large scale". Communism does appear to work with small to modestly sized communities, but once the number of people grows beyond a certain size, communism starts to break down because of unavoidable human condition factors such as greed and laziness. Communism only works as long as there are enough people in it that are willing, for whatever reason, to work for each other and give to each other. As the number of people who may not share this ideal reaches a critical mass in any community, it quickly outweighs the rest of that community's ability to support itself, and the system falls apart. The general breaking point for communism appears to be when the group becomes large enough for people to not feel any personal obligation to the society as a whole, which, owing to size limits on the number of people that any one person can directly socialize with on any level, coupled with the fact that subgroups inevitably form where everybody knows everybody in the subgroup, and they mostly socialize only with eachother, in practice seems to be no more than several hundred people. Larger groups can have limited apparent success at implementing communism, but in practice, it is always shown that they cannot sustain themselves indefinitely, and the system invariably falls apart.
File under 'M' for 'Manic ranting'
that's what the autosuggestion is doing - just turn off autosuggestion and all those problems go away
We all don't know whether or not Lyonnaise de Garantie are crooks but we do know that they tried to censor the web to remove any connection between lyonnaise-de-garantie.com and crooks or escroc. We assume Lyonnaise de Garantie are not crooks, although we haven't yet seen proof that they aren't. Some people say that the cover-up effort was successful.
HTC EVO 4G LTE w/ CM 10.2 | NookColor w/ CM 10.2 | Samsung Epic 4G w/ CM 10.1
Give that smelly homeless cunt some of your money then you sanctimonious prick.
I prefer to do things like plant perennial food bearing plants around my community and organize the donation of food I grew to the hungry and invest put time, effort and money into pushing the RepRap project forward. But I've personally provided housing to close to a hundred homeless people who needed it over the years, and helped them get work.
I walk the walk, asshole.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Right. The Amish are out there being communists. You fucking moron.
It was called community values, and America USED to have it, just like they USED to require that a corporation demonstrate on an ongoing basis that it served the public good to exist.
It always amazes me when Americans say that communism failed when they've been fighting it as a nation for over 50 years and now have their lips locked in a death grip on China's teat. It's like there are stupid pills in their water supply.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
Right, Europeans have never exploited anyone, and certainly haven't built up wealth as a result of exploitation.
http://spreadingsantorum.com/
All better now? Happy to help!
It amazes me that the conversation is still framed in terms of those binary opposites when the earth's most vibrant societies clearly combine ideas from capitalism, socialism, and many other frameworks.
There are 1.1... kinds of people.
One thing to be said about communism is that they built to last, and not to throw away. Once we start drowning in our own waste, the "success" of capitalism and rapant consumerism will be reassessed.
Communism *can't* be tried on a large scale, because it doesn 't scale. It is arguably the best form of government for a group of fewer than 50 people...provided that the group is allowed to kick out members for willful sponging. And the groups can be quite democratic, though they often aren't. (Communism and democratic are not antithetical. They speak to different aspects of life.)
OTOH, no successful group remains communist. (Please note the lower case c. It was there in the prior paragraph too, but the word was always sentence initial, so you couldn't tell.) It grows, and then it either stops being communist, or stops being successful.
Socialism is an attempt to take the ideals of communism and apply them on a much larger scale. It seems to work fairly well.
If, on the other hand, you meant Marx-Lenin-ism, that isn't any longer communism, however it may have tried to cloak itself. And it wasn't that much of a success, until it was blended with Stalinism, at which point it became moderately successful, even if extremely unpleasant. (Successful and pleasant are also not antithetical, but neither are they identical.) The more appropriate name for such a system is Tyrrany. Or Autocracy. Such systems, under sane leadership, can be quite successful, and over time tend to turn into Monarchies. (But it takes two or three generations of leadership.)
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
No, he wasn't wrong. One alwasy needs to consider the failures as well as the successes if one wants to understand the basis for success.
OTOH, he was being an orator, and only bringing up the points he wanted to you to attend to. Never trust an orator. Even when he tells the truth, he's lying.
But he was more honest than most political speeches that you'll hear this year.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
I think it's stronger in the exploited than in most of the less exploited. The strong don't feel that it's right, in fact they feel a bit guilty about it. They just don't let the guilt stop them.
As for the belief that it's right... that goes back to an old religious belief that the Puritans, among others of the time, had that the favor of God was demonstrated by success in this world, and that therefore anything that you do which increases your success if justified because it shows that God favors you more.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
The difference is that committing a murder is illegal, but reporting that "escroc" is commonly associated with "Lyonnaise de Garantie" is not.
If someone said Lyonnaise de Garantie is a crook, and if that person was wrong, then Lyonnaise de Garantie should be going after that person.
Are you sure that saying "personnes ont affirmé Lyonnaise de Garantie est un escroc" is not illegal by French law? In France, you aren't innocent until proven guilty, and their libel laws don't line up with US libel laws either. It is highly possible that unless Google could irrefutably prove that "Lyonnaise de Garantie est un escroc," they would be found guilty.
Opinions from those who know the appropriate areas of French law?
Government fraud? really?
It's like there are stupid pills in their water supply.
Flouride?
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
I walk the walk, asshole.
Thank you for that
The new right fascists are bilingual. They speak English and Bullshit.
Parent translated into French using "you know who's" translator:
...
Lyonnaise de Garantie est le problème ici, pas le gouvernement français. Bien sûr, cela est une décision mal, mais ça arrive tout le temps dans les systèmes judiciaires. Bref, ils tentent de plaider l'écart l'opinion de quelqu'un d'entre eux. Je trouve ce genre de comportement doit être la forme la plus base de l'intimidation, et je me sens obligée de contribuer à l'effet Streisand"
À mon avis, la Lyonnaise de Garantie entreprise française à un homme, sont pires que des escrocs. Ils sont le limon le plus épouvantable et dégénère avilir, de l'ordre le plus bas. Les baiser, elles sont la variole sur le monde et un gaspillage de l'air. Pour appeler un paquet de cons sans valeur apporterait la honte au packs itinérant des cons sans valeur. Jean-Luc Berho, le vice-président de l'entreprise ne peut se résoudre à l'orgasme, sans moins qu'il s'étouffe un chien à mort. Jean-Jacques Olivié, président de ce pack slithering des reptiliens, ne peut faire confiance pour ne pas s'étouffer s'est accidentellement à la mort s'il est laissé sans surveillance avec un fade croissants. Peut-il attraper la syphilis par une mule ivre arménien. Fraudes à l'assurance pourrait apprendre quelque chose de ces voleurs, comme on pouvait la lamproie et autres vermines tubulaires sucer le sang.
Mais, hé, je peux me tromper. Après tout, c'est juste une opinion.
Then the public outcry there would force the government to abandon its efforts at censorship, which are ultimately doomed to fail anyway.
'The Economy' is a giant Ponzi scheme whose most pitiable suckers are the youngest among us and the yet-unborn.
I walk the walk, asshole.
Thank you for that
You are welcome.
-1 Uncomfortable Truth
I would bother asking for cite
;)
The French do not have a Common Law legal system. The US does. Simple as that.
Ideally, Civil vs Common law really shouldn't matter all that much; In practice, people (such as judges) do not function well as logic-parsing automatons. As a result, instead of seeing similar outcomes between cases with similar sets of facts, you have every French judge left to boil 208 years of law, spread over 40 volumes of steadily increasing length and complexity, into their own personal version of "the truth".
For an analogy to how well that works in the US, ask ten random Americans what it means that "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed", and you'll likely get ten completely different answers. Fortunately, in the US, we only have a single court that regularly goes back to "first principles", and even they tend to give at least a nod to the application of common law through the tradition of stare decisis.
Now, none of that has anything to do with corruption or stupidity, which we both (and indeed, all) have in abundance in our governments, no argument there.
" yet where is the success of capitalism in Africa, Asia, and Latin America?" implies there is none. That was flat out wrong when he said is, and even more wrong today.