Do you have anything useful to contribute to the conversation? Or are you so focussed on others' posting behaviors that you can't see your hypocrisy in refusing to create and use an account and bent on wasting everyone else's time?
You don't have to be a "fanboy" to see how pointless your posts are.
So when will TD shut down its comments section for fear of litigation?
You're one of those morons who claim Y2K was a bunch of hype for nothing, aren't you?
This will end something like the Y2K episode where non-techies laugh at how all the hype was for nothing when, in reality, absent the hype and all the fixes that were deployed the year 2000 would have been a catastrophe. Now, all the sites that proactively prepare for SESTA to avoid litigation will be laughed at when 5 years from now they still haven't been sued.
The general public is chock full o' morons.
Your drivel is hidden by a vote of the other readers here. Let that teach you something.
Things being worse elsewhere doesn't exonerate those involved in this case. Whataboutism is a poor way to deal with issues.
Mr. Toad's Wild Ride, straight to the bottom.
We've already witnessed legal enforcement cross international boundaries. Being in another country is no guarantee of safety any more.
Occam's Razor dictates that Zuck is far more likely to be a profiteering asshole than a sociopath. He knows exactly what he's doing. But he is no doubt lying every step along the way.
They could back their own bond without external help. And it's unlikely the value of the bond would come anywhere close to the profit made from "violating the restrictions". Still no proper motive to behave well.
Cambridge Analytica should never have had access to the data in the first place. There would be nothing to bond if privacy was respected.
In the EU they're mostly interested in trying to extract money from the Facebook juggernaut rather than block it or shut it down. Russia may well block it for reasons entirely unrelated to privacy. Turkey and others have toyed with blocking them.
Blocking Facebook means blocking a potential (or actual) revenue stream. That's not a typical activity of most governments. They're more interested in fines that generate short-term revenue and deals that generate longer-term revenue.
As always, it's all about the money.
I don't understand why the public no longer trusts our police. It doesn't make any sense.
/s
#yetAnotherNotch
Doubly so if the video was uploaded by the makers themselves in order for it to be downloaded - even if misnamed to fool potential pirates, that makes it an authorised, legal download!This. The torrent they uploaded was not the one they charged money for. They offered this version freely at no charge. There was no theft, no piracy involved. Funny, but misguided.
They didn't post this to a "pirate site", they posted up torrents. Very different things. Torrents are not piracy by definition. Piracy is committed when you post commercial content without a license to do so. Those who download that material are not automatically pirates as they can't know immediately whether that material was inappropriately posted (in most cases). Many torrents of commercial software, for example, still require paid activation keys.
It seems you don't understand what "whataboutism" is.
You're talking about movies, not games. I've been playing shooters (online and off) for decades and I've never seen (or at least do not recall seeing) any character in a video game "walk away blowing the smoke off the end".
Yes, many games are violent in nature but upbringing taught me right and wrong. Games are entertainment, not life lessons.
Your portfolio holds a significant position in Facebook, doesn't it?
To add to that, "crackers" break DRM partly for the challenge and partly for the notoriety, mostly the latter. Give them an opportunity to gain that or an even larger degree of notoriety and don't be surprised if they go for it even if the process and result are entirely above board.
Re:
I've heard that same doom several times over several years and it still has had no detrimental impact on the market. Java is "dying" as programming is "dying", i.e. it's not.
What happens in the android world has next to zero impact on what happens in all other places java is used. And this ruling won't have much, if any, impact on java usage elsewhere with the narrow possibility it will shut down OpenJDK.