You're obviously correct in the de jure sense, here. But there is also a matter of relationship expectation.
An unstated assumption of using any "free" product is that it's not actually free. Canonical screwed up, to be sure, but I do think many of us just expect getting harassed by salespeople to be the cost of using a "free" product.
Microsoft, on the other hand, charges me by the hour for using Azure. They've taken their pound of flesh, so my business expectation is that I'm going to be left the hell alone for anything other than billing matters. Them sharing the data in the first place, for something I've paid money for, FEELS like the bigger violation to me.
Maybe I'm too old, and stuck in the mud with the pre-ICANN intention of the original TLDs, but does it seem odd to anyone else that they host their network services on .com and their corporate information on .net?
I've read some non-mainstream theories that economies based on cash accounts and equity-only investments are possible. Some would argue that equity-only investment arrangements are better for society, as they align interests between capital and production in a way that recourse interest lending cannot.
You can already see some fintech startups attempting equity-based home "loans", in which the "lender"'s lien is on a percentage of the future sale value of the home, not a fixed dollar amount. It will be interesting to see how this develops.
I'm not sure how financing on consumer debt like credit cards and non-commercial vehicles would work, though. Perhaps discouraging consumer profligacy would be a feature, however, not necessarily a bug.
IANAL, but my understanding is that obstruction of justice via spoliation, tampering, or destruction of evidence is a charge that requires your investigation to have already begun, the raid to have already started, or the arrest to have been made, and that you are free to destroy any of your own property prior to these events.
Specifically, you need to knowingly be the subject of an investigation. I'd assume destroying the phone when you see the cops coming but before you've seen the warrant would be a grey area. Please, lawyers, clarify.
While this comment is not, on its own merits, "appropriate" for HN, I have to admit it rings true.
Journalists have been the tip of the spear in matters of doxxing and cancellation. Without speaking to the specifics of whether this particular journalist is deserving of cancellation, there is much to be said of the Schadenfreude, here.
Yes, but retail is going to get destroyed in the end.
The power elite always get what they want. Right now there appear to be curbs on GME and AMC buy orders for TD Ameritrade and Schwab customers.
If you have to pull strings with your drinking buddy from Dartmouth to blow up a bunch of propertyless zoomers in order to prevent a margin call on the account you've leveraged to buy your house in the Hamptons, then that's what you're going to do.
Pretty much this. I highly suspect this is just a matter of advertising chasing ROI.
Firearms, ammunition (if you can even find it), plate carriers, plates, optics, NVGs, holsters - all of it is selling for at least 200% what it was one year ago right now. Everyone running ad campaigns is seeing ROI > 3 and dramatically increasing spend.
Once bids rise to the point that ROI is normalized, we'll see less of this.
Exactly. It would be a bit of a gamble, as it may undercut their x86 lines, but as a hedge against the success of ARM/M[1,2,...], they may do themselves a favor to attempt a project to implement RISC-V.
They don't have much to lose, as AMD is already killing their x86 lines anyway.
Too late to edit, though.