HappyMeatbag

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.

I have no idea who those two guys in the background are, but I feel sorry for them anyway just because they’re there.

Lmao it is now my goal to use the phrase “language salty enough to cure pork”.

The Founder Pounder series could be interesting. With horny shape shifters, the depravity is limited only by your imagination!

Why do I keep hearing about this? Goldman Sachs screwed up, and they have no one to blame but themselves. Chance and bad luck were not involved at any stage. I’m sure the terms were decided on well in advance, and in excruciating detail, which is supposed to be what they’re good at. All the information they needed was right there.

They could (and should) have seen this coming, but instead, they were blinded by greed, didn’t do the math, or both. Boo fucking hoo.

This is a good idea, but I have a suggestion:

Wait until these people are even more desperate. They bought these houses as vacation homes and rental properties, and knew the area was at risk. They’re lucky to be getting anything at all.

They don’t need the money. Play hardball, and save it for the thousands of people who will.

Wow, that’s bad. She looks (and moves) like she’s from The Sims.

I used to have one of those black plastic (or was it Bakelite?) Space-Commander 400 remotes, pictured in the black and white ad.

I was walking home from grade school. Somebody was getting rid of their ancient TV, and had left it on the curb. The boxy, awkwardly shaped remote was in its “holster” on the TV, so I grabbed it and took it home. Before then, I had assumed that only infrared wireless remotes existed.

The idea that a remote could work by ultrasound fascinated me, and the fact that it didn’t even need batteries absolutely blew my little mind.

I just avoid those conversations completely. It’s a nightmarish situation, with a long, complicated history. Many opinions are uninformed, and I don’t think I have anything of value to add.

While my tastes are different, yours is an opinion I can respect, because you recognize Mulgrew’s awesomeness.