Bezos, Soon-Shiong, and Musk might just be pragmatists, instead of cowards, Stephen T. If they do not care if Trump undermines democracy and the law, and if they expect either an actual or perceived quid-pro-quo benefit from Trump for nixing endorsements, cowardice seems like the wrong failing to charge them with.
Outside an Atlanta Hawks game years ago, I tried to give away for free two extra comp tickets. A police officer (city police, not private security) stopped me and gently (I am white) told me that I would be breaking the law, and made me move on. He was obviously protecting corporate interests, not citizens' interests. I wonder how many anti-big-government, pro free-market Republicans would approve of the officer's actions without a second thought.
He knew he was being videoed, so even if he had planned to pocket some or all of the money, he probably felt he had to turn the money in. If he was dutifully and honestly following policy and training by taking vendors' money, had be been issued a pad of receipts? Did he give the vendor a receipt? If the campus police are not given receipts to issue to people whose money they seize (however useless in retrieving one's money), it should look a lot like looting even to people who have not yet come to realize the corruption inherent in asset seizure.
I'm not convinced that short selling should be illegal, just limited, if I understand this right. A short seller has to borrow shares of the company and pay interest while waiting for the stock to fall. What strikes me as worthy of outlawing is "naked short selling," because that allows someone to sell shares that he or she does not own and does not have to borrow. If (as if) enough investors refused to make their shares available for others to borrow, short selling would be a minor problem, and maybe sometimes a useful market device. But there are no limits to naked short selling, and to its ability to irrationally drive down as company's share price until the company dies.
Actually, Anonymous Coward, that apology really is an apology for what they allowed to happen. But only to the extent that "this" caused "concern and frustration," which minimizes the actual damage that could, and probably will, happen to some people. The apology is soothing, but not too far from "we apologize for the fact that our security inadequacies has sent you crybabies into hysterics, whining to rapacious law firms, you bastards."
One of the Walpoles wisely said that "Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think." I too am immensely amused by Trump, not the first time I have agreed with Anonymous Coward. But in my more lucid moments I try to remember that his buffoonery will immiserate, and maybe cause the death of, countless human beings (and animals, given the likely end of factory-farming animal protection regulations). Now I am off to see what this The Purge is.
Agreed, this is absurd. But one or two court cases decades ago apparently established (in law, or in lawyers' minds) the idea that a trademark holder must vigorously oppose *all* even trivial, stretch, or good-cause infringing uses, or risk later losing cases of serious trademark infringements, as if the trademark was effectively abandoned property. Hence all those stories of big corporations sending cease and desist letters to kids' lemonade stands. The company might not really care, but it wants documentation of efforts to protect the trademark.
Is Ron Wyden the only senator fighting the good fight to protect the Constitution on these issues? I can't think of a second, but I hope someone here can.
If PC users save a couple of bucks, great, that is little enough compensation for their using Microsoft. Scrivener is a wonderful program if you are writing a complex project (e.g. novel or non-fiction book), I believe, given its file organization and ability to rearrange parts, and its ability to hold all of your notes and raw material. Scrivener does have a long learning curve, but it also has useful support and forum help.
Are the billionaires cowards?
Bezos, Soon-Shiong, and Musk might just be pragmatists, instead of cowards, Stephen T. If they do not care if Trump undermines democracy and the law, and if they expect either an actual or perceived quid-pro-quo benefit from Trump for nixing endorsements, cowardice seems like the wrong failing to charge them with.
Police protecting business
Outside an Atlanta Hawks game years ago, I tried to give away for free two extra comp tickets. A police officer (city police, not private security) stopped me and gently (I am white) told me that I would be breaking the law, and made me move on. He was obviously protecting corporate interests, not citizens' interests. I wonder how many anti-big-government, pro free-market Republicans would approve of the officer's actions without a second thought.
Did the Berekely officer issue a receipt?
He knew he was being videoed, so even if he had planned to pocket some or all of the money, he probably felt he had to turn the money in. If he was dutifully and honestly following policy and training by taking vendors' money, had be been issued a pad of receipts? Did he give the vendor a receipt? If the campus police are not given receipts to issue to people whose money they seize (however useless in retrieving one's money), it should look a lot like looting even to people who have not yet come to realize the corruption inherent in asset seizure.
Short selling? What about naked short selling?
I'm not convinced that short selling should be illegal, just limited, if I understand this right. A short seller has to borrow shares of the company and pay interest while waiting for the stock to fall. What strikes me as worthy of outlawing is "naked short selling," because that allows someone to sell shares that he or she does not own and does not have to borrow. If (as if) enough investors refused to make their shares available for others to borrow, short selling would be a minor problem, and maybe sometimes a useful market device. But there are no limits to naked short selling, and to its ability to irrationally drive down as company's share price until the company dies.
That apology
Actually, Anonymous Coward, that apology really is an apology for what they allowed to happen. But only to the extent that "this" caused "concern and frustration," which minimizes the actual damage that could, and probably will, happen to some people. The apology is soothing, but not too far from "we apologize for the fact that our security inadequacies has sent you crybabies into hysterics, whining to rapacious law firms, you bastards."
the word lead
"lead" only in the sense that a mule driver with a whip csn be said to lead the mule.
Re: laughing like hell
One of the Walpoles wisely said that "Life is a tragedy to those who feel, and a comedy to those who think." I too am immensely amused by Trump, not the first time I have agreed with Anonymous Coward. But in my more lucid moments I try to remember that his buffoonery will immiserate, and maybe cause the death of, countless human beings (and animals, given the likely end of factory-farming animal protection regulations). Now I am off to see what this The Purge is.
But you know how lawyers are
Agreed, this is absurd. But one or two court cases decades ago apparently established (in law, or in lawyers' minds) the idea that a trademark holder must vigorously oppose *all* even trivial, stretch, or good-cause infringing uses, or risk later losing cases of serious trademark infringements, as if the trademark was effectively abandoned property. Hence all those stories of big corporations sending cease and desist letters to kids' lemonade stands. The company might not really care, but it wants documentation of efforts to protect the trademark.
Is Ron Wyden the only senator fighting the good fight to protect the Constitution on these issues? I can't think of a second, but I hope someone here can.
For Mac users, the price is great
If PC users save a couple of bucks, great, that is little enough compensation for their using Microsoft. Scrivener is a wonderful program if you are writing a complex project (e.g. novel or non-fiction book), I believe, given its file organization and ability to rearrange parts, and its ability to hold all of your notes and raw material. Scrivener does have a long learning curve, but it also has useful support and forum help.
Re:
Anonymous Coward, half of my pleasure and interest in Techdirt comes from your comments.