Creative solution!

I honestly don’t know. True or not, though, it’s an interesting idea!

Yeah. What the hell were the plaintiffs supposed to do? How do you get proof of something like this? Break into an exec’s office? Hack an auto manufacturer’s network?

Oh, wait a sec. Evidence that’s acquired illegally generally isn’t admissible. So even those ridiculous plans wouldn’t work. I guess the best we can do is wait until the harm is done, and then hope there’s a sloppy enough paper trail to unequivocally prove exactly who did it.

Apparently, that’s MUCH better than using some common sense.

An auto manufacturer, who has no business snooping on your texts in the first place, should not have permission to keep copies of them. Ever. It’s an absurdly obvious question. The plaintiffs shouldn’t have to prove they’ve been harmed. The auto manufacturers should have to prove that their intentions benefit all customers, AND that those benefits outweigh the risks.

And no, advertising that’s specifically targeted at my perceived needs and interests doesn’t count as a “benefit”. Sorry not sorry.

I’m going to assume this judge hasn’t been unduly influenced.

This looks like a classic case of following the letter of the law, while ignoring the spirit of the law. The law seems like it’s intended to punish harmful violations of privacy. No reasonable person can conclude that the sale of tens (or hundreds) of thousands of people’s private data is entirely harmless, but that’s what this judge did.

US courts often take “reasonable” assumptions into account when making judgments or issuing sentences. Just because the plaintiffs couldn’t actually prove specific damage is no reason to assume it didn’t/won’t happen.

To me, it should only “matter” for technical reasons - to help find the root of the problem and fix it at the source. If your roof is leaking, then fix the roof. Don’t become an expert on where to place the buckets.

You’re right, though. It doesn’t matter in terms of excusing or justifying anything. It shouldn’t have been allowed to happen in the first place.

Something as simple and obvious as this makes me wonder what other hidden biases are just waiting to be discovered.

No. I never tried to say it. I just plain said it…

I’d like to point out to folks that whatever your stance on the issue may be, this statement (taken by itself) is pretty funny.

Please excuse the interruption and continue.

I don’t like it one bit.

The government sees it as a strategic need to have a strong ally in the region. That view will not change, at least not anytime soon. The Pentagon considers it a national security issue, which puts it beyond politics. Unfortunately, I have to live with that.

No need for the text at the top. The pic itself is great!

But they should be used sparingly

Good. You get it.

I’m thinking about specific web pages that use very small text for the body of an article. Then, once I’ve adjusted my browser so it’s legible, the text on other websites is ridiculously big.

Sadists. Or perhaps I’m giving them too much credit. Maybe they’re just morons.

Tiny text. If you’re designing something for people beyond their mid twenties, don’t use anything less than a 12pt font.

deleted by creator

I wouldn’t so much as think of attending even if it was right in the next town, so okay. Do it. I’ll enjoy reading about what a disaster it was.

My brain insists that this is terrible, but, I’m laughing, so…

If I felt like I was forming a “friendship” with one of these artificial personalities, I’d want more control - not in a maniacal way, but because I wouldn’t trust Meta (or whoever) not to say “meh, this isn’t profitable, so we’re shutting it down next month.”

We’re already far too dependent on corporations, but in most cases, they haven’t had the power to emotionally damage us in this specific way. I don’t want to give them that kind of power over me.

Thank you. This is the first seriously negative thing I’ve heard about her, and I’d like to give her the benefit of the doubt. A person can grow and change quite a bit in ten years.

deleted by creator

Assuming what you say is true, I’d like to see reddit pay major, highly publicized consequences for this. I don’t expect it to actually happen, though. I hope I’m wrong.

I really don’t like it when corporations become involved in public services.

I really, really hope this is the case. I’d love to see him pay some serious consequences, especially if it’s the result of his own arrogance.