That's not what a precedent is.

Well, was it? Is that your claim, or not? Were they subscribing now for a future discount, or was the subscription for current use? Seems pretty straightforwards. Note that it doesn't matter what they anticipate unless it was promised.

Sometimes a company does make future promises to get people to subscribe now based on FOMO. Is that the case in these services? I don't use them, but my understanding is that people are merely subscribing to what is currently offered.

The hand-waving you open with doesn't apply to what you cited.

You cited a statute that merely shifts it so that a class can sue before the anticipated harm, whereas normally you'd have to wait for the harm to happen to sue.

They still need loss or damage.

"The product might have been better" isn't a harm.

They'll have trouble proving even 1 cent of harm, since they don't pay for results they pay for access.

You can't sue that your burger could have been better, for example.

It's the only option, the police can't be involved in providing it at all or they'll lose their warrant loophole.

You're one of those dingbats who still doesn't realize they're going to do all the things their terms of service let them do.

They claim they use the "chats" for training, but you consider it a "conspiracy theory" that they might use them for training.

You're an idiot. There's no conspiracy. They use the user interactions for training, and part of that signal is detecting results that the user had a very positive reaction to, and providing those results to others.

The real "conspiracy theory" is your idea that they leave money on the table for some unknown reason.

Why do you want to root their device to defang it, requiring you to first give money to a bad company?

Wouldn't not buying it be a superior approach?

True, and China doesn't want to overreact too much since they're constantly interdicting other ships unlawfully, even in other countrys' exclusive economic zones!

Fire? You're gonna burn the rugs again and buy new ones, aren't you?

The others players in an indie MMO would likely lost their minds in somebody got P2W items from investing in the company, much more so than if the company was simply selling them to everybody.

But the good games only sell cosmetics.

That it doesn't have a real-world effect is part of why I buy cosmetics in games, and also look down on people wearing fancy dress IRL.

In the former, I'm paying to look good to myself. I the person who is mostly likely to be looking at my character. I'm upgrading my own experience.

In the latter, people are trying to be elitist. It's a very different thing.

That's been continuously true since the 1950s.

Most ruzzians are used to writing in fixed width all-cap fonts. It's a point of pride for them, just like standing on the toilet seat and squatting down to pee.

To be fair, he was already making taxidermy turtle faces in the `90s.

Perhaps, but they've not shown any ability to make plans and execute them at strategic times so far.