111–120 of 366 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A crook is someone who is dishonest. You don't think someone cheating on their wife is dishonest?
Not playing a game of word association. When accusing a public figure of being a criminal, focus on explicitly illegal, not immoral acts.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
And not just massive. It needs to be an order of magnitude more than they made from those deals. Too many times companies get slapped on the wrist for an amount considerably less than they made from their illicit activities. Which I never understood. Normal people that get caught doing things like selling stolen goods have to pay a fine on top of all money they may have made from selling it. Why aren't companies trea…
> Why aren't companies treated the same? It's more of a hostage negotiation. You want to hurt the company and it's owners, but if you sue too hard, you're likely to just hurt it's workers and it's customers. It's why preventing companies from reaching _anything near_ monopoly size is so important for corporate jurisprudence. "Too big to fail" is just the tip of this insane iceberg we've allowed to grow into our econo…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Banning books and squashing rights doesn't pay for itself! /s said as a Texan that vehemently disagrees with the gov't in charge
> Banning books I don't see how comments saying that are accepted here. Everyone knows that no books are being banned anywhere in the country. You can go to a bookstore or web site and buy whatever books you want. They can be bought in public or delivered to your home. Publishers can publish whatever they want. The First Amendment protects authors, publishers, and readers. Meanwhile, in the UK, if you share a message…
But it's a lot closer to a total ban than it is to not banning books. (And I stand by "forcibly," if you've seen any of the adults screaming at school board hearings or issuing threats over these books)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also, the surveillance is bad because of the inherent breach of privacy.
I think these systems are bad and I think vehicle manufacturers piping data directly to insurance companies should be illegal whether you consent or not. That being said, "but privacy" has always struck me as a weird argument. There is no reasonable expectation of privacy when a vehicle with a particular license plate is at a particular intersection or on a particular public street. Some jurisdictions extend some pri…
While your insurer may, by happenstance, see your license plate while you are driving around, they certainly are not following you 100% of the time. The degree to which your location is tracked when your license plate is plainly visible, is different than degree of privacy expectation when that location is being automatically recorded.
> So when it's in public, the location of your car is not "private" information.
It's just not that simple. It would be nice and convenient if "private" was a boolean value. But it is very much a float type:
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Banning books and squashing rights doesn't pay for itself! /s said as a Texan that vehemently disagrees with the gov't in charge
> Banning books I don't see how comments saying that are accepted here. Everyone knows that no books are being banned anywhere in the country. You can go to a bookstore or web site and buy whatever books you want. They can be bought in public or delivered to your home. Publishers can publish whatever they want. The First Amendment protects authors, publishers, and readers. Meanwhile, in the UK, if you share a message…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Why aren't companies treated the same? It's more of a hostage negotiation. You want to hurt the company and it's owners, but if you sue too hard, you're likely to just hurt it's workers and it's customers. It's why preventing companies from reaching _anything near_ monopoly size is so important for corporate jurisprudence. "Too big to fail" is just the tip of this insane iceberg we've allowed to grow into our econo…
I say, let the company be forced to be auctioned away and a ban on the executives from holding board/executive position for the next 5 years
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Banning books and squashing rights doesn't pay for itself! /s said as a Texan that vehemently disagrees with the gov't in charge
> Banning books I don't see how comments saying that are accepted here. Everyone knows that no books are being banned anywhere in the country. You can go to a bookstore or web site and buy whatever books you want. They can be bought in public or delivered to your home. Publishers can publish whatever they want. The First Amendment protects authors, publishers, and readers. Meanwhile, in the UK, if you share a message…
because they are true. "The district then banned 14 titles (bringing its total since 2021 to 30), including popular books by Dr. Seuss and Judy Blume"[0] i don't see how comments like yours are even made here, but at least they are not accepted.
[0] https://www.texastribune.org/2023/10/11/texas-library-book-b...
Fun fact, as a owner of a GMC auto I got a innocent looking email about the discontinuation of the Onstar Smart driver service which was the service in question that violated many US laws and sent data to insurance companies without customers authorization. I hope this hits GM really hard as this type of behavior will never cease until massive amounts of money is extracted from the perpetrators(GM etc).
its not just that i don't want electronics built into cars i don't want data coming from my car i don't need a phone to be built into my car i don't need navigation to be built into my car they need to stay in their lane we need anti-enshittification laws
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The same thing that incentivizes them right now, legal requirements to maintain a certain minimum amount of auto liability insurance in order to be able to legally drive. Which, by the way, is currently far less than a million dollars in every jurisdiction I know. https://www.autoinsurance.org/car-insurance-requirements/
may i introduce you to the jurisdiction of germany? 7.5m for personal injury, 1.3m for property damage and 50k for ?financial loss? (ger:reiner vermögensschaden) [1][2]. granted that's in euro so exchange rates are to be considered [1] https://www.bussgeldkatalog.org/deckungssumme-kfz-haftpflich... [2] https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/pflvg/anlage.html edit: as a point of comparison, i can't find it at moment but i…