Logging in to someone else's account because they didn't change their password when they switched jobs is what passes for hacking here.
You are talking about this case, but i am talking about the larger societal implications of how we treat corporations and people. In terms of the technicalities of the ruling, you're right - to the supreme court, it doesn't matter what kind of business it is, but it should.
The corporate owners as individuals shouldn't be compelled to do anything - the corporation should be. By conflating one with the other we are heading even farther down the same path of ever-growing corporate power and ever-shrinking corporate responsibility. If you are allowed to run the corporation as an extension of yourself, but not required to take full responsibility for the corporation's actions, that is a big fucking problem.
Anyone who cannot separate their personal beliefs from their corporate responsibilities should probably not be running a corporation. Anyone who can should probably be viewed with extreme suspicion.
The individuals retain their religious liberties just as every employee of a business does, but the corporation itself cannot have religious beliefs and therefore should not be able to express religious beliefs through its policies. A private, unincorporated business owner could.
Corporations have more freedom and less responsibility than individuals do - that's fucked up.
If there were "no real difference between the business and its owners" it wouldn't be an incorporated entity - it would just be a business and they would be its owners. When you accept the benefits of incorporation you should also have to accept some of the drawbacks, including slightly more limits on what that business can and cannot do. Any time you take an entity with limited liability and responsibility and give it more freedom you are playing with fire.
Corporations are not people and treating them as such is just fucking stupid. "Corporations' religious beliefs" is a phrase that makes us all dumber every time we are forced to parse it.
At this rate we'd all be better off incorporating ourselves and treating our meat-sacks as employees of our corporate overminds.
There are two separate issues here and people seem to be arguing past each other.
1) Is Ikea right? Yes, they probably do have a case and could win in court.
2) Is Ikea acting like a bunch of assholes. Yes. The right way to do this would be to send IkeaHackers an email opening negotiations without an explicit legal threat. "Hey, we like what you're doing but you're using our trademark and it could be confusing to customers. Please add a trademark disclaimer and more links directly to our site. Here's a suggested disclaimer for use:..."
In playground terms, a C&D is like saying, i'm going to punch you in the face if you don't get off that swing right now.
Apple's greatest strength and most damning faults laid bare in one comment.
It just works, you know what you're getting, your old stuff keeps working.
Evolutionary, not revolutionary. Does not play well with others.
Minus the phone.
I like the iPad, but this is true.
From TFA: "7.85 inches diagonally, 1024×768 pixels at 163 PPI — the same pixels-per-inch density as the pre-retina iPhones and iPod Touch."
IE next year's model will have a better display. Wait and buy then if this is a product that interests you.
When all you have is a tin foil hat, everything looks like a communist alien mind control ray.
The best part about those shirts - most of the people they are making fun of are too dumb to understand that your shirt is making fun of them. Wearing one is like a secret handshake for reasonably intelligent people.
I hereby make a motion that everyone immediately and permanently stop work on all controller innovations that do not involve jacking our brains directly into the computer. Who's with me?
How the hell did Delft get ME3 ahead of the rest of us? What are Majorana's loyalty mission and romance options?
Raise your hand if you are surprised by this news? What? Nobody? I didn't think so.
Entry level requirement is a GED. An hour-long training session on "professionalism" isn't going to turn a bunch of HS dropouts into ethical, responsible people if they weren't already there.
(Which is to say that i don't mean to paint every TSA employee with the same brush - it's just that the bad apples have more power to "make a difference" than the good ones do. Some of these people are just good folks who are trying to keep people safe and earn a decent living. It's not their fault the entire premise of their agency is flawed and their leadership is more interested in CYA than in actual safety.)
But this doesn't seem to shed any new light on things. Does it give us new insight into what we should be doing or avoiding? Does it provide us with any new ways to deal with problems? Nothing is obvious to me off the bat, but time will tell if some novel application of this observation will bear fruit. Right now, it's just an interesting phenomenon.