The problem is lazy, disengaged, stupid voters who vote the way Facebook tells them to. Banning Russian ads (or corporate ads, or any other kind of political ads) won't change this.
And the sore loser Democrats know this. They don't want to change how it all works. They just want to change who gets to manipulate the voter.
The people that tell you that Windows 10 is the spawn of Satan and a retarded goat seem to be the same ones who insist that systemd will cause the complete destruction of the physical universe, dog and cats living together, and dingoes to each your children.
Unfortunately, that's not the choice. The choice is "an OS that runs the software I have to use" and "an OS that doesn't run the software I have to use."
The judge has already approved adding the racketeering charge to the suit. Not sure of the rules under California's RICO, but it's probably similar to federal rules. That means that the plaintiff has shown some pretty compelling evidence, and it becomes very difficult to stop it from proceeding to trial, once it's been certified.
The police, or at least the DA have to be involved to file a racketeering charge. Not going to happen.
Patently untrue. Both federal and California RICO statutes allow for private enforcement. A prosecutor would be necessary for criminal prosecution, but state RICO laws allow for treble damages in civil cases, which could easily run into the billions. It's difficult to do, but the judge has already been convinced to allow it.
why is this news?
Why do you comment on something you clearly know nothing about?
Which still doesn't mean the bank will dispose of real currency that is still legal, just because somebody suggested it might not be, someday, eventually.
My point is that banks don't have the facilities to print money,
That's why it would be counterfeit currency. And even if it is art, if it was convincing enough that they can't tell at a glance, It's still counterfeiting, unless it's very, very expensive art.
So you think that they print counterfeit money in a bank and when it fails they cut up the bad batch and flush it down the toilet at the bank?
Criminals have done far, far stupider things. Often. Like writing a bank robbery note on the robber's own deposit slip, or filling out an employment application at a fast food joint, then robbing the place on the way out.
More likely it is a modern art installation...
That, too, is disturbingly plausible.
Or maybe the banks are implementing the new European idea of phasing out 500Euro bills, I just don't know why Switzerland would do this and why any particular bank would do it this way, but at least that makes some sense.
I seriously doubt Switzerland gives a shit about denominations of Euro notes, since they don't use Euros. And if they bank is disposing of currency, they'll be doing it through a well documented official process.
Which is to say, he thinks that he, and only he, is the final arbiter of how people should use their own property, regardless of how they want to use it.
Since Google is one of the wealthiest companies in the world, and are not, as OP noted, meeting most people's demands, I'd say OP's point is incorrect. And so are you.
They have to attract eyeballs, but they don't have to do so by providing precisely what everyone wants. Or even do so honestly. They just have to attract eyeballs.
The product is not meeting customer demand (after all, Kay is a customer, and his demands aren't being met).
No. He's not the customer. Google is an advertising company. Their product is eyeballs, not search results. over 90% of their revenue comes from advertising.
"If you're not paying for the service, you are not the customer, you are the product."
on how people would react, since it is presently illegal to send out a self driving car onto public roads without a person there ready to take control. If it were legal, people would react differently (like, probably, fewer of them would call the cops).
I think a "fit for purpose" argument could be made that phone sold under a two year contract should last two years.
I also have doubts that Apple was completely unaware that their phones would, in fact, be sold under two year contracts when they agreed to sell them to the carriers.
Slashdot Mirror
The problem is lazy, disengaged, stupid voters who vote the way Facebook tells them to. Banning Russian ads (or corporate ads, or any other kind of political ads) won't change this.
And the sore loser Democrats know this. They don't want to change how it all works. They just want to change who gets to manipulate the voter.
The people that tell you that Windows 10 is the spawn of Satan and a retarded goat seem to be the same ones who insist that systemd will cause the complete destruction of the physical universe, dog and cats living together, and dingoes to each your children.
Unfortunately, that's not the choice. The choice is "an OS that runs the software I have to use" and "an OS that doesn't run the software I have to use."
The judge will laugh him out of court.
The judge has already approved adding the racketeering charge to the suit. Not sure of the rules under California's RICO, but it's probably similar to federal rules. That means that the plaintiff has shown some pretty compelling evidence, and it becomes very difficult to stop it from proceeding to trial, once it's been certified.
The police, or at least the DA have to be involved to file a racketeering charge. Not going to happen.
Patently untrue. Both federal and California RICO statutes allow for private enforcement. A prosecutor would be necessary for criminal prosecution, but state RICO laws allow for treble damages in civil cases, which could easily run into the billions. It's difficult to do, but the judge has already been convinced to allow it.
why is this news?
Why do you comment on something you clearly know nothing about?
The supersonic part is in the upper atmosphere, and takeoff and landing is out at sea. This mitigates most noise issues.
But not the legal issues.
I do feel obligated to point out that the same is true of Uber drivers, and there have been Uber drivers prosecuted for rape, nonetheless.
Your "logic" isn't.
That's a mirror, dude, not a magical tricorder.
Instant gratification isn't fast enough.
keep all of one's suck in one basket. If you drop it, you'll get suck all over your shoes.
Those are both symptoms of the same paranoid dementia.
Which still doesn't mean the bank will dispose of real currency that is still legal, just because somebody suggested it might not be, someday, eventually.
My point is that banks don't have the facilities to print money,
That's why it would be counterfeit currency. And even if it is art, if it was convincing enough that they can't tell at a glance, It's still counterfeiting, unless it's very, very expensive art.
So you think that they print counterfeit money in a bank and when it fails they cut up the bad batch and flush it down the toilet at the bank?
Criminals have done far, far stupider things. Often. Like writing a bank robbery note on the robber's own deposit slip, or filling out an employment application at a fast food joint, then robbing the place on the way out.
More likely it is a modern art installation...
That, too, is disturbingly plausible.
Or maybe the banks are implementing the new European idea of phasing out 500Euro bills, I just don't know why Switzerland would do this and why any particular bank would do it this way, but at least that makes some sense.
I seriously doubt Switzerland gives a shit about denominations of Euro notes, since they don't use Euros. And if they bank is disposing of currency, they'll be doing it through a well documented official process.
if it's maybe a failed test run by a currency counterfeiter?
Really?
Which is to say, he thinks that he, and only he, is the final arbiter of how people should use their own property, regardless of how they want to use it.
Like I said.
Glad you agree.
Since Google is one of the wealthiest companies in the world, and are not, as OP noted, meeting most people's demands, I'd say OP's point is incorrect. And so are you.
They have to attract eyeballs, but they don't have to do so by providing precisely what everyone wants. Or even do so honestly. They just have to attract eyeballs.
As long as over 90% of Google's revenue comes from advertising, yeah, they are.
That people use the devices they paid for in the ways they want to , instead of how he tells them to.
It's all for our own good, you know. Daddy knows what's best for everyone.
The product is not meeting customer demand (after all, Kay is a customer, and his demands aren't being met).
No. He's not the customer. Google is an advertising company. Their product is eyeballs, not search results. over 90% of their revenue comes from advertising.
"If you're not paying for the service, you are not the customer, you are the product."
They are, indeed, more than just an ad company. But over 90% of the total revenue comes from advertising.
They odds of Google "getting on board" with this are less than zero. They may well hire ninja assassins to take out the Apple execs behind this.
on how people would react, since it is presently illegal to send out a self driving car onto public roads without a person there ready to take control. If it were legal, people would react differently (like, probably, fewer of them would call the cops).
I think a "fit for purpose" argument could be made that phone sold under a two year contract should last two years.
I also have doubts that Apple was completely unaware that their phones would, in fact, be sold under two year contracts when they agreed to sell them to the carriers.
That doesn't mean the changes they demand won't make it even more flawed.
"Do something, even if it's wrong" is a really stupid way to run an economy.
"If you're not paying for the service, you're not the customer, you're the product."
Makes you wonder who the customer of this textbook actually is, doesn't it?
So you're OK with Yelp suppressing good reviews and refusing to remove libelous ones unless they're paid? That's just "an employee doing their job"?