Perhaps worth noting, there was a SCOTUS decision in the early 2000s (New York Times Co. v. Tasini) that held that freelance journalists whose contracts did not specifically include an electronic distribution clause were entitled to damages when those articles were subsequently released on the web and to electronic news services like Lexis/Nexis.

Big publications like the NYT came to settlements that allowed them to pay to redistribute the older articles (by paying the original authors), but smaller publications may not have such a settlement structure in place and may not be allowed to redistribute the original articles without additional permissions.

FYI, I have a copy of the Dragon Magazine Archive CD-ROM version that came out in 2001… only to immediately disappear off the market for this very reason!

Satya Nadella, Microsoft’s CEO, “has taken on the responsibility personally to serve as the senior executive with overall accountability for Microsoft’s security,”

Err. Wasn’t that already true? He’s chief executive officer, not chief some shit that doesn’t include security officer.

resolve it in whatever way CF deemed appropriate

CloudFlare deemed the upgrade to Enterprise service appropriate.

Will you be able to buy Google Wallet gift cards with cash, and charge up Google Wallet so you can make POS and online payments?

Because I suspect that was a main driver of Google Pay.

But, the guy admits that what they were doing with the domains was expressly permitted in the “Enterprise” class service. If it was expressly prohibited in the “Business” class service, then they set themselves up for the shakedown.

First of all, congrats! Your business must have become pretty successful. How exactly did CF decide to “ask” you to switch to Enterprise?

Maybe…

* You violated their terms of service…

I wouldn’t say Cloudflare is innocent, here, but this business handled Cloudflare the cudgel that was used to beat them. They admit to doing something with their domains that was expressly prohibited in the service they were paying for.

It must be Thursday

Fundamentally, it’s the same issue that affected the Stanford Prison Experiment & the Milgram experiment. You can’t claim that the subjects naturally developed certain behaviors, if they were being prompted or saw through the prompts.

Since Sherif proved himself to be untrustworthy after the first experiment failed to provide the results he was looking for, we can’t really trust that any of the conditions of the conflict between the campers arose from the campers themselves.

Robbers Cave has been debunked. Short version:

Muzafer Sherif’s first experiment (“Middle Grove”) failed when the two groups worked together to figure out that they were being manipulated. The second experiment (“Robbers Cave”) was only apparently successful because the “camp counselors” were explicitly aiding and abetting the feud between the two groups.

Of course, Sherif didn’t mention these details when he publicized his results.

Legally unassailable!

The song is from the perspective of the company, not the consumer.

You labor under the impression that they would only track & keep data if the user was logged in.

Who changed the username in the on-board OnStar system? Did you think to perform a full factory reset on the car’s electronic systems, before selling the car? CAN you?

I’m an IT professional and I am not sure of that at all.

Perhaps. There is a lot you can do to present the right appearance w/ respect to financial transactions. There’s not so much you can do when companies are exchanging data about your routine activities behind you back. Or they assume it is about you, who is going to hold them to account? Nobody.

we don’t need to worry about lions eating us

Someone didn’t read the line item in the EULA.

I wonder how selling the car impacts the data stream? If you could show that the automaker and LexisNexis aren’t properly handling the transition of the car’s owner from one to another – effectively penalizing the original owner for the actions of a subsequent owner – there might be a legal angle of attack to assert damages.

We’re headed rapidly toward a social credit system, but run by our corporate overlords instead of government. To quote The Stupendium:

You seem so surprised, what did you expect?

We’re thinking outside of that box that you checked

The terms were presented in full to inspect

You scrolled to the end just to get to “Accept”

Spectrum’s “deal” for my location was 500/10 mbps for $90/month “introductory price”. I asked what the price would be at the end of the introductory period, and they refused to tell me.

Meanwhile, Frontier gives me 2/2 gbps for $100/month, no price changes.

I have no interest in TV, I don’t even pay for streaming, so at the end of the day Internet performance is all I care about.

I was surprised that Stewart was so glib.

Yes, watching video on your phone, in short bites, is “like” TV, and arguably some of that content can come from full-fledged “TV shows” with diverse talent and production companies and cable distribution…

But surely it has not escaped Stewart’s notice that a shocking amount of eyeball time is now on video content that is not produced by mainstream media – instead made by small creators & online teams working from their homes. And if you doubt the impact of that, go down to Walmart or Target and spend some time on the toy aisle. The shelves are PACKED with Baby Shark, Cocomelon, Busy Beavers, Blippi… all of these streaming-first non-mainstream brands that are mostly famous because of Youtube.

It’s odd, because Stewart himself is the one who benefited when cable TV made “narrowcasting” a thing. And now that there are even narrower narrowcasts, he can’t seem to see that it’s an existential threat to his way of making content.

I am so, so, SO glad I’m now in a home with access to fiber Internet. Real, 2 gigabit symmetric fiber.

The cable company keeps sending me glossy ads in the mail - several per week - trying to get me to go back to 1/4 the bandwidth at the same price. Uhhhh… no.