Does this mean police will have to turn off their body cams when kids are around or when interacting with kids? What about the always-on dashcams, wll polce (or anyone who has one) have to turn those off now in case they capture kids on footpaths or as passengers in other vehicels? No more wide-angle photos from the air/space of cities? Schools will have to disable CCTV security cameras?
[Note: The “no-man’s-land” reference is also weird. Putting aside the gender skew, this concept usually refers to territory between opposing forces’ trenches in World War I, where any person entering the zone would be machine-gunned to death by the opposing force and thus humans cannot survive there for long. How does that relate to Section 230? It doesn’t. If anything, Section 230’s immunity creates a zone that’s overpopulated with content that might not otherwise exist online–the opposite of a “no-man’s-land.” The metaphor makes no sense.]Unless by 'man' they mean 'lawyer'. It's a no-lawyer's-land. Any lawyer trying to dredge-up liability gets shot down in a hail of bullets ...
First off, full disclosure: I live in this state.Fake news! Everyone knows that South Dakota is a myth, a goverment conspiracy alongside the moon landings, a spherical Earth, and that no aliens were at Area 54. We all know that the moon landings never happened, the Earth is flat, Area 54 is an alien holiday resort, and South Dakota doesn't exist.
ctually manages to differentiate between those smutty sites you don’t want little Johnny seeing, and the ones that’ll teach him how to understand what a period is.Pornhub is educational, it taught me about:
To be pedantic:
Only people can get patents.As alluded to later on in this post, this statement is not accurate. For example, a corporation can "get" a patent. As stated later:
But the Patent Act requires inventors to be “individuals,” which means “a human being, a person” in Supreme Court precedent."Individuals" have to be the inventors of the invention to which a patent is being sought, but that is not the same thing as the one 'getting' or holding the patent. Therefore a corporation can file for and receive ("get") a patent on inventions made by its human employees, despite the fact the corporation is not an individual.
It’s been a wonderful example of the blistering stupidity of the “growth for growth’s sake” mindset, the perils of mindless consolidation, and our obsession with completely pointless megadeals that genuinely only benefit investors and higher level executives. Everybody else, from artists and employees to consumers, gets screwed in the form of layoffs, higher rates, or lower quality product.So, in other words, a typical for-profit corporation?
Do they know something we don't about an upcoming undead rising?
And when the world’s richest man does something pathetic it’s going to get covered by the media regardless of how certain people feel about him.When did this become about Bernard Arnault? I thought we were dissing Elon Musk?
Wow, I first misread that title as "The LSD Church ..." Silly me confusing a body full of scatter-brained hallucinating people with the LSD Church.
last year, we finally switched from our old, home-built platform to WordPress.And the site still works? Amazing! :D
If you stopped clicking on those "boner pills" links, maybe TechDirt wouldn't get so much spam about them due to lack of traffic.
What would be amusing is if Twitter is evicted by REIT, which by extension would mean the sub-letter Dentsu would also get evicted, which would likley put Twitter in breach of contract to the sub-letters, Dentsu, and then getting sued by both REIT for unpaid past rent and Dentsu for breach of their lease agreement with Twitter...
Surely this poison pill would have come out in a pre-sale due diligence process that would make any (sane) potential buyer run for the hills and forget they ever considred making an offer?
When something is stolen, it’s not the responsibility of the owner to do something about it, except to call the police.The vehicle was on Hertz's own lot, such that they were able to issue a new lease contract, hand over the keys, and have that third party drive it off the lot. By definition the vehicle was not stolen.
Twitter doesn't care where the money comes from. Twitter doesn't have a sales contract with these questionable Saudi Arabian and Qatari investors, it has a contract with Musk and the acquisition company. If the US government bans certain Saudi Arabian and Qatari investors from investing in the aquisition company, that's a financing hole Musk has to fill, not a reason to back out of the acquisition..
They haven't dropped the paywall, they've changed it from a cash payment to a payment-in-kind, i.e., providing personal information to proceed through the paywall.
Maybe this is the one you are looking for? https://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png
Employment at will means they could have fired her for any reason even if they didn’t like her shoes.No, no it doesn't. They cannot fire her for a discriminatory reason or for a reason that breaks a law or for a reason that breaks any contractual obligations they are under (I don't mean employment contract - otherwise they wouldn't be 'at will', I mean, for example, a consent decree where they have entered into a contract to not undertake certain activities).