Yeah, corpos always claim that. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain, we just changed some words, it doesn’t actually have any practical effect…

Yeah, well if it doesn’t then why bother doing it?

Censorship is bad, but Facebook and X’s entire business models revolve around spreading content that is at once false and inflammatory, either just to create engagement or for more malicious purposes, and they reach a huge portion of the population directly, including children, teenagers, the mentally ill and other vulnerable populations. This requires a new understanding of accountability for spreading information.

I wouldn’t agree that it makes sense to hold a Mastodon instance responsible for what its users post, because they don’t have a financial incentive or the ability to promote misinformation at a massive scale. Twitter does. As Aristotle said, we must treat equals equally, and treat the unequal unequally according to the form and extent of their inequality.

deleted by creator

“I can’t wait for my PC to load the classic Windows UI elements, the Metro elements AND THIS NEW UI all at the same time regardless of what applications I’m running. It’s not going to put unnecessary strain on the hardware or introduce annoying bugs and instability at all!” -Somebody, probably.

Nintendo’s hardware used to have features that competitors lacked. The DS’s dual screens, the 3DS’s 3D top screen, the Wiimote, the Wii U’s controller with a second screen. Even the Virtual Boy did something different, though it didn’t do it well. Nintendo used to innovate on hardware while everyone else was just going for bigger numbers. Exclusives made sense as they made use of those features that you just couldn’t get elsewhere.

The Switch and Switch 2 have this portable/dock gimmick but that doesn’t really affect gameplay in a way that makes the software incompatible with a PC or a Playstation 4/5. And there’s the Steam Deck and a load of other portable gaming PCs out now, so even if it did there’d be no justification for a Switch exclusive other than greed and an unwillingness to prioritize the consumer.

They can’t unless the parties agree that they can. The sneaky part is the “by continuing to use our services, you agree to the new terms” part, which is standard practice. You’d have to terminate your account before the new terms come into effect, then take them to court to make sure they didn’t keep your data around and use it to train their AI anyway because they “didn’t notice” that that particular content belonged to someone who didn’t accept the new terms.

Nothing suspicious at all about being contacted by the subject of a news story just to say it’s not newsworthy. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain.

Then the few people who don’t are very prolific commenters because it’s a mistake I see often.

Just because this is a common enough mistake, I’m going to publicly correct you for the benefit of other people who might see this comment. I apologize.

It’s Martial Law. Not Marshall Law.

Yes, exactly in that way. The second grader might have a bit of an edge on Bethesda tbh.

You’re asking for a blanket statement from me but giving specific examples.

Regarding what you said before the quote block, yes. My generic objection to EULAs would be lifted in this case.

Regarding the obviously objectionable example clauses in the block and after it, I am opposed to those but they are a reason to reject the particular EULAs which contain them, just like any contract which contains similar dispositions (imagine having to agree never to eat at Burger King when you buy a Big Mac).

My previous comment was about things that are generally wrong with the practice of EULAs because they have become a de facto standard, and was not meant to imply that those are the only things that can possibly be wrong with any EULA ever.

EULAs should be completely non-enforceable in a sane world. They are enormous, full of frivolous dispositions just to bloat them and discourage actual reading (like the infamous prohibition against using iTunes to help you build nuclear weapons) and rarely are they ever available before you’ve already purchased the software. Instead, they’re presented to you only as part of a setup program where the font is minuscule, Ctrl+F doesn’t work and which often doesn’t allow copying+pasting the EULA to a non-retarded text window somewhere else which actually allows you to read it comfortably, save it or even print it out. EULAs are a perfect example of contracting in bad faith and if any Law student anywhere ever created a EULA-like document as part of a Civil Law assignment, they would get a failing grade automatically because no professor in their right mind is going to read more than two paragraphs into that obviously malicious bullshit with 50 other papers to grade.