Follow Slashdot stories on Twitter

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×

Comment Re:Hard in the US (Score 1) 488

Silly is how absolutely naive that was. Lying is the basis of advertising- an industry whose raison d'être is to make you buy something you wouldn't want to otherwise.

False advertising laws don't restrict lies, but only certain types of lies. The kind you suggested is not among those and easily circumvented using the word 'cool people drink X'.

Comment Re:Curtail 'free speech' by lying corporations? (Score 1) 488

Definitely- good point. Campaign finance is definitely an important place where Israel is a way more democratic nation than the US. "Citizens United" (our recent Supreme Court ruling on the matter) was a huge step backwards.

Another is the actual viability of new political parties. People here claim that if we didn't just have two parties, we'd suffer from the problem of minority rule Israel does, but we have that already, courtesy of the filibuster, anonymous hold, and other such undemocratic tricks.

Comment Re:Curtail 'free speech' by lying corporations? (Score 1) 488

Only its defense, not its social policies which are entirely self-funded.

Federal aid is limited to military expenditures, and those must be purchased from the US. So it actually comes down to being yet another handout to the American military-industrial complex

PS- Be a dick if you like, throwing around words like 'utopia' to disparage that which you don't understand.

Comment Re:Curtail 'free speech' by lying corporations? (Score 1, Interesting) 488

Considering this story is about Israel, you sound even sillier than you crazy conservatives usually do. Those aren't just promises. Education is free, healthcare co-pays aren't just cheap but are merely symbolic, and pensions still exist. Oh, and they still maintain a massive military budget, and don't owe China their firstborn.

Your move.

Comment Re:Google's motivation (Score 1) 219

then they can renegotiate the ToS with us.

Because that worked so well for them recently? Truth is this is a no-win situation for them. No matter what they do, a small number of anti-Google fanatics will cry bloody murder, and low-quality editors will help them spread their nonsense.

Now before you go crying about that "fanatics" I used, let's take a look at three points:
1) EPIC's "report" glosses over the fact that the supposed "overbroad" terms are global to the entire collection of Google services, and was not specifically designed for Google Drive. So attributing a bunch of general terms which apply to a comment you post on a public Google+ photo, to your private Google Drive files is naive at best, and intentionally misleading at worst.
2) That was "reported" by MacWorld. Not exactly a clutch of Google fans who are trustworthy in checking the facts.
3) Who are the other so-called "privacy advocates" in the MacWorld story? DropBox users.

On Dropbox’s online forum a user by name of Chen S. wrote...
Another user, Christopher H., said this in the Dropbox forum:...
Still another Dropbox user, Mark Mc.,

Next thing you know, we'll have Linux users coming here and ripping on Microsoft.

Until a decent reporter tells us something substantial, this should be seen as a non-story to all but the tin-foil folks.

Slashdot Top Deals

You knew the job was dangerous when you took it, Fred. -- Superchicken

Working...