billytetrud

10 ms·

61.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> the court ruled that no one could reasonably view it as an offer to make the jet available as a reward And I told you I think they were wrong. > Even if that wasn't the case, what is the substitute product? All of the other gar
62.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> the court ruled that no one could reasonably view it as an offer to make the jet available as a reward And I told you I think they were wrong. > Even if that wasn't the case, what is the substitute product? All of the other gar
63.
by billytetrud 5y ago
1) Ok. And the intent at time of advertising was always not to see the jet. So I don't see your point. Still seems to apply at the time of advertising. 2) They did indeed not ever intend to sell the thing advertised. So again, what are
64.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> electing not to sell a unique item at an advertised price when a concrete offer is received is not the same thing I disagree. I think it very much is the same thing. Unless they had other reasons (other than that they didn't want
65.
by billytetrud 5y ago
While you're absolutely right, I don't see how its relevant in this case. >you'd have to show that the plan all along was to use the initial offer as bait in order to draw a buyer into some other deal. I mean, its pretty o
66.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> Bait-and-switch isn't a legal cause of action That seems pretty dumb to me. Then you're telling me it not actually illegal? There's no way to enforce advertisers not from doing a bait and switch? Count me skeptical.
67.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> Pepsi never cashed the check. So maybe if the guy had actually first obtained all the point, then demanded the jet, the suit might have come out differently? > cited for is puffery I'm no expert on puffery, but if the definitio
68.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Perhaps that was a misake on the plaintiffs part. But the ruling does seem to contradict legal precedent around bait-and-switch advertising. So its still a bit perplexing.
69.
by billytetrud 5y ago
There's a difference between what is legal and what is right. What is actually legal is muddled in stacks of overriding law and legal precedent that no "reasonable person" could every really know completely. I would bet you t
70.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Yes, that is what I'm saying doesn't make sense. If those reasons hold up, then all of bait-and-switch advertising is legal to do - which is obviously not the case. Unless the ruling is saying that bait-and-switch advertising is o
71.
by billytetrud 5y ago
They didn't run out of harrier jets tho, they never intended to give them away in the first place.
72.
by billytetrud 5y ago
I don't think you're correct. Bait and Switch advertising is not legal and the FTC will go after those that do that kind of thing.
73.
by billytetrud 5y ago
My guess is corruption. Barring that tho, they probably usually had asterisks everywhere.
74.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> An advertisement doesn’t oblige the advertise to engage in a specific transaction with a customer. While that's probably true, an advertisement does oblige the advertiser to actually be offering those things at the terms advertise
75.
by billytetrud 5y ago
No, "a user" in my sentence is intended to mean a human. Its very possible to program software to require human approval for connections. Also, if malicious software is already running, then it will be able to make connections to
76.
by billytetrud 5y ago
If the software is executing "arbitrary instructions" from remote sources, then its a malicious piece of software, or so horribly negligent to amount to the same thing. So I don't agree that direct connections are the problem
77.
by billytetrud 5y ago
The article says his suit was rejected because ads don't obligate the advertiser to anything. That seems more or less false. False advertising is explicitly against the law. I don't understand why a ruling would be made implying t
78.
by billytetrud 5y ago
It's super weird you think passing costs onto consumers makes the problem go away. When a company passes costs to their consumers, consumers buy their product less, so that company loses money anyway.
79.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Nothing about IPv6 prevents continuing to do that when it makes sense (eg to prevent cheaters from dosing their opponents).
80.
by billytetrud 5y ago
You mean without? Well you're wrong. It's not a security concern at all. Allowing anyone from the outside to connect to any port they want is a security concern, simply because there's a lot of insecure software people run th
81.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Honestly, that's absolutely absurd and no one should ever rent from you. Also, reminding someone a couple days before their arrival is no excuse to have confusing and absurd policies like that. Unless your listing makes it really clear
82.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> A reasonable person would not bring a dog to a property where it was already established that dogs are not welcome. I disagree both that the author "brought a dog to the property" and that a reasonable person wouldn't in
83.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> we have an author who admits to being busted for breaking the rules? No. If you think the author "admitted" breaking the rules, then we don't agree on how to be a reasonable person while renting someone your property. I
84.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Your paranoia about what bad guests can do doesn't excuse the landlord in the article for being a petty douche. Bringing a friend over who has a pet is not a reasonable thing to prohibit, nor is complaining about his daughter coming &q
85.
by billytetrud 5y ago
Interesting analysis. I think this is a great manual for how companies should view their value adds, not by gate keeping data, but by providing services that make it easier and better to use that data.
86.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> it’s not compatible with technical writing and will likely get the paper rejected if it is done there Something seems to be going wrong there if easy to understand writing is rejected by papers. > Journalists should consult with exp
87.
by billytetrud 5y ago
> Treating academia as one homogeneous group isn't helpful I disagree. Academia by and large has a lot of common traits. I've been a programmer for a loooong time, and the majority of academic CS papers are opaque and inaccessi
88.
by billytetrud 5y ago
If something is clearly written, it shouldn't take 10 readings. Information density often is at odds with readability. In programming material, there is a difference between learning oriented explanatory documentation and dense referen
89.
by billytetrud 5y ago
The problem is that academia seems to encourage and reward this kind of hypercomplex writing
90.
by billytetrud 5y ago
It's interesting, but brutal. I wouldn't call this "awesome". Beating up your mother isn't "brave". This is literally a monkey dictatorship. That alpha is probably really shitty to be around.

More ›