Makes you wonder if there's value in all that data they've been slurping up from their "customers".
Certainly the principals of an unregulated company that's in a desperate cash doom-loop with funding shut off wouldn't resort to selling all that juicy highly-exploitable private data to any entity that flashes cold hard cash in front of their faces, would they?
Of course not, don't be silly.
"Up next on Maury, we'll reveal the DNA test that proves whether Microsoft Bob is the actual father of Wordpress and Sharepoint's baby. Stay tuned for the shocking results!"
"Searchlinkfix" works well for bypassing, have used it in Firefox for years.
Available in addons but repo is here for completeness: https://github.com/palant/sear...
Agreed, listened to the talk and it was clear what's going on here in terms of not being a dupe. Just wanted to boost my self-worth by beating the other kneejerk FPers to the punch.
I feel great now but do want to offer my apologies to the
So Richard Stallman is 138 years old and gave a 184 minute presentation?
Everything you said but worth emphasizing the interface really is wife-friendly. That's a make-or-break for most people. Can also run on top of FireTV and AppleTV with just a bit of effort to leverage existing hardware. Plus mythtv-backend with a HDHomerun works pretty flawlessly these days for an OTA DVR, not a huge hassle like the old days.
+1 Insightful. But was really hoping the ending was where you do the Hollywood thing, when he's walking out of the courtroom in handcuffs he glares back at you with the realization that you really weren't an idiot and then you give a cool smirk CSI-style as the ultimate I completely pwned you arrogant jackass.
Dangit.
The complaint is that the fees are substantially higher when the order passes through Google's button since the restaurant has a discounted agreement with the delivery services built into their ordering system. So if you ordered directly from the restaurant and used Doordash, it's much cheaper for them. If the restaurant claimed their business on Google or somesuch and clicked the enable Order Online button, then that would be fair game. But there wasn't any consent or permission given to Google to insert themselves into the ordering process so that's the issue.
From Section IV, A in the complaint:
36.
Plaintiffs, like many class members, maintain a branded order-taking website at
www.limefresh.com, where consumers can place delivery and take-out orders directly with Lime Fresh
restaurants. All orders placed by consumers on the Lime Fresh website are routed to the specific Lime
Fresh restaurant selected by the consumer upon check-out, and all revenues received for each order
flow to the designated restaurant. For take-out orders, the customer picks-up the order directly from the
restaurant, and the ordering process is costless to the restaurant. For orders requiring delivery, Plaintiffs
entered into an agreement with a delivery service (DoorDash) on a fixed-fee basis at a fraction of the
net-cost of the typical fee charged by Delivery Providers for the same order.
For each delivery order from Lime Fresh’s website, Plaintiffs pay their designated delivery
service (i.e. DoorDash) a net fee of approximately $2 per order, versus $4-6 per order as charged by the
typical Delivery Provider (20-30% of a typical $20.00 order is $4-6 per delivery order). For each take-
out order, no fee is charged to Plaintiffs from the Lime Fresh’s website; versus a fee of $1.20-4 for
similar orders processed by the typical Delivery Providers (6-20% fee of a typical $20.00 order is $1.20-
4 per take-out order).
That was the basic default in the old days, and privacy was a lynchpin of American life.
But easy capital and arrogance has warped Silicon Valley into an anti-privacy hellhole over the last generation or two. What was once an amazing place of invention has disappeared, and turned a healthy chunk of the average Joe's 401-K into a minefield of trivial advertising companies.
But, per the complaint, the restaurants never had any interaction with Google, the button just appears in the results. So how could they possibly log in and turn off the Order Online button "if they prefer"?
More to the point, why would the burden be on the restaurant to fix a problem created by the scummy actions of the company that's taking advantage of them?
"C. Scenario 1: Google’s Online Storefront.
63.
The first webpage, referred to herein as “Google’s Online Storefront” (or “Storefront”),
is a virtual storefront, whereby consumers can place orders for the restaurant’s food items, all under the
restaurant’s tradename. But Google never obtained the restaurant’s consent to set-up the Storefront, or
to use the restaurant’s tradename."
Not sure what its data rate is, but my GE unit didn't have any feature restrictions out of the box. Just toss the bowl of oatmeal or whatever in there and press the start button. You may want to look into switching vendors.
That was an excellent article. Mod up.
So in other words, if you have an iPhone and get into a car accident you'll be ok?
Very surprised they would let this happen to higher profile accounts so often now, simply because it represents such a direct threat to their base revenue stream. The safe bet would seem to be that it was due to an algorithmic change problem vs. the right thing to do blah blah (algo meaning either some actual flagging code or review policy change or both). So suspect the folks that let this happen will get a spanking internally and rollback to the safe zone.
Btw, here's another high(er) profile account that got hit recently:
https://twitter.com/GeorgeGamm...
"Ninety percent of baseball is half mental." -- Yogi Berra
