It's time for President Trump to get out his trust-busting stick. Break up Alphabet!
Android - separate company Chrome - separate company YouTube - separate company Gmail - separate company Search - separate company Advertising - separate company Maps - separate company
Break up Alphabet now! Stop Google before it's too late!
The "agreement" foisted on customers is a one-sided leonine contract. It carries no ethical weight whatsoever. Moreover, should an aristocrat choose to contest it, its enforceability in kangaroo court is uncertain. Commoners, of course, have no legal rights in Soviet America.
"Rubisco, which is short for an actual chemical name that's very long and hard to remember."
What kind of sophomoric fucktard would write something that patronizing? Hard to tell if he himself is a proud idiot, or if he just assumes his readers are moronic rubes. (Which is probably true, given that it's an NPR article...)
It's time for President Trump to get out his trust-busting stick. Break up Alphabet!
Android - separate company Chrome - separate company YouTube - separate company Gmail - separate company Search - separate company Advertising - separate company Maps - separate company
Arrest Sundar Pichai. Shut down the dangerous mad science projects. Arrest the nazi mad scientists. Shut down the wannabe-Skynet AI. Arrest those mad scientists too.
Break up Alphabet now! Stop Google before it's too late!
Does Sinophobia have to be racist? Personally I quite like Chinese culture and Chinese people. But it would be very foolish indeed to imagine the Chinese state is a geopolitical ally of America.
You may well have that right as an individual. Your limited liability company, on the other hand, has NO rights at all. Because rights are for humans not for corporations.
Article summarized: Geriatric billionaire recommends using exotic unproven technologies to create yet more hypertoxic radioactive waste - 'cuz hey, he's going to be dead in a year anyways, so fuck the risk!
As other respondents have pointed out with needless vulgarity, YouTube's one-sided "terms of service" almost certainly give them the legal right to use her content without compensation. The problem here is that _all_ "terms of service" documents essentially say the user has no rights - fuck you, prole, that's why.
This practice is called "lawful fraud". It occurs wherever one party is unilaterally allowed to define the terms of commerce. What's needed is legislation akin to the Uniform Commercial Code (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Commercial_Code) to set standard, fair business practices for online services.
I, for one, would be delighted if it turns out that cyberstalking is not a viable business model.
But of course that assumes Big Brother Google, Faceboot, et al actually make their money from "ads". Whereas many people have long suspected the majority of their revenue comes from selling mass surveillance data to governments and parastate corporations.
BLM got huge press coverage - it was never a *popular* movement - because it was bankrolled by billionaire Nazi collaborator George Soros and embraced by the semi-official fake news media as a tactic to divide the working class along racist lines.
Slashdot Mirror
Yay, more censorship, yay! Big Brother Google is gonna save us from ourselves!!
It's time for President Trump to get out his trust-busting stick. Break up Alphabet!
Android - separate company
Chrome - separate company
YouTube - separate company
Gmail - separate company
Search - separate company
Advertising - separate company
Maps - separate company
Break up Alphabet now! Stop Google before it's too late!
"Plenty of individuals have successfully beaten large corporations and government"
Hahahahahaha - hoohoo - hee hee - hahahaha wheehee hahaha! That's a good one!
The "agreement" foisted on customers is a one-sided leonine contract. It carries no ethical weight whatsoever. Moreover, should an aristocrat choose to contest it, its enforceability in kangaroo court is uncertain. Commoners, of course, have no legal rights in Soviet America.
No no no no - Big Brother Google would NEVER spy on us. Because Big Brother Google loves us all!
"Rubisco, which is short for an actual chemical name that's very long and hard to remember."
What kind of sophomoric fucktard would write something that patronizing? Hard to tell if he himself is a proud idiot, or if he just assumes his readers are moronic rubes. (Which is probably true, given that it's an NPR article...)
It's time for President Trump to get out his trust-busting stick. Break up Alphabet!
Android - separate company
Chrome - separate company
YouTube - separate company
Gmail - separate company
Search - separate company
Advertising - separate company
Maps - separate company
Arrest Sundar Pichai. Shut down the dangerous mad science projects. Arrest the nazi mad scientists. Shut down the wannabe-Skynet AI. Arrest those mad scientists too.
Break up Alphabet now! Stop Google before it's too late!
Does Sinophobia have to be racist? Personally I quite like Chinese culture and Chinese people. But it would be very foolish indeed to imagine the Chinese state is a geopolitical ally of America.
Fuchsia: it spies on you 50 different ways, AND it lets you run all your favorite legacy Android spyware!
You may well have that right as an individual. Your limited liability company, on the other hand, has NO rights at all. Because rights are for humans not for corporations.
There are no lizard people. Just good old fashioned suitcases full of money and racist divide & conquer tactics.
There is no technical solution. It's time for Congress to ban companies from cyberstalking and data hoarding.
"it offends our moral sensibilities that we might not have any moral high ground to stand on when it comes to workers and their rights."
Everyone knows that in Soviet America workers have no rights.
Sounds like a (bad) public policy decision to me.
This totalitarian dystopia has gone too far. It's time to de-Stalinize America.
Article summarized: Geriatric billionaire recommends using exotic unproven technologies to create yet more hypertoxic radioactive waste - 'cuz hey, he's going to be dead in a year anyways, so fuck the risk!
As other respondents have pointed out with needless vulgarity, YouTube's one-sided "terms of service" almost certainly give them the legal right to use her content without compensation. The problem here is that _all_ "terms of service" documents essentially say the user has no rights - fuck you, prole, that's why.
This practice is called "lawful fraud". It occurs wherever one party is unilaterally allowed to define the terms of commerce. What's needed is legislation akin to the Uniform Commercial Code (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Commercial_Code) to set standard, fair business practices for online services.
I, for one, would be delighted if it turns out that cyberstalking is not a viable business model.
But of course that assumes Big Brother Google, Faceboot, et al actually make their money from "ads". Whereas many people have long suspected the majority of their revenue comes from selling mass surveillance data to governments and parastate corporations.
BLM got huge press coverage - it was never a *popular* movement - because it was bankrolled by billionaire Nazi collaborator George Soros and embraced by the semi-official fake news media as a tactic to divide the working class along racist lines.
All of them.
Arrest Zuckerberg. Shut down Facebook. Seize and sell their assets. Ban businesses from cyberstalking and data hoarding. For a better future!
Reducing pollution is not a "liberal" issue. It's a small-c conservative issue. Because we want to _conserve_ the environment.
I have no idea if/how the climate is changing. But I'm hella fucking sure there is too much filthy plastic garbage defiling our land and water.
That's not inflation - that's public policy.
+1 interesting
No way. $1 million isn't enough to get even one cabinet minster's kid admitted to Stanford. Think bigger!