Arthur T Knackerbracket has found the following story:
[...] One of the most popular online weather services in the United States, the Weather Channel app has been downloaded more than 100 million times and has 45 million active users monthly.
The government said the Weather Company, the business behind the app, unfairly manipulated users into turning on location tracking by implying that the information would be used only to localize weather reports. Yet the company, which is owned by IBM, also used the data for unrelated commercial purposes, like targeted marketing and analysis for hedge funds, according to the lawsuit.
The city’s lawsuit cited an article last month in The New York Times that detailed a sprawling industry of companies that profit from continuously snooping on users’ precise whereabouts. The companies collect location data from smartphone apps to cater to advertisers, stores and investors seeking insights into consumer behavior.
[...] “If the price of getting a weather report is going to be the sacrifice of your most personal information about where you spend your time day and night,” said Michael N. Feuer, the Los Angeles city attorney, “you sure as heck ought to be told clearly in advance.”
-- submitted from IRC
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Sunday January 06 2019, @12:29PM (5 children)
For example, I do believe that you have once written a sensible post, but that cannot, or at least should not, be used as evidence that you aren't a complete fucking retard - your whole ouvre is what people should be looking at, although only a tiny fraction of it is needed to come to the correct conclusion.
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Sunday January 06 2019, @04:34PM (3 children)
To the contrary, a counterexample is a sufficient rebuttal to a universal claim. Here, it definitely means you aren't a complete fucking retard which is a universal claim. Seriously what is there to argue about?
Ranter1:"X ALWAYS happens!"
Ranter2:"Here's a case where X didn't happen."
Ranter1:"That doesn't count!"
Ranter2:"WTF?"
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday January 07 2019, @04:46AM (2 children)
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday January 07 2019, @01:56PM (1 child)
The actual label was "complete fucking retard" which indicates universality of the retardedness (and a rather deep level of retardedness as well), not merely that one is retarded.
It comes from the use of the term "complete", a universal term. Words have meaning and the meaning of that phrase runs completely counter to the point you were trying to make. I wouldn't have brought this up otherwise.
(Score: 2) by FatPhil on Monday January 07 2019, @04:25PM
Great minds discuss ideas; average minds discuss events; small minds discuss people; the smallest discuss themselves
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Monday January 07 2019, @02:23PM
"All the racist shit" is also just a few examples. What you're really saying here is that we'll look at a few examples of Lincoln being racist (which conveniently remain unstated in this thread!) and ignore a few examples where he's not. That's just bias.
In addition to Frederick Douglass's assessment (and really a person who supposedly doesn't like black people manages to gull Douglass? Sure, Lincoln is a politician, but Douglass dealt with plenty of politicians by that time), Lincoln had a long standing opposition to the spread of slavery (public opposition to slavery from at least 1837 [washingtonpost.com]), had such an anti-slavery reputation that the South took his election as sufficient provocation to leave the US, and of course, the Emancipation Proclamation in 1863.
I think this is an example of the dishonesty brought to the topic of racism. I don't believe you looked at Lincoln's "whole ouvre" (particularly, blowing off obvious counterexamples right away). Nor is racism a bit flag you set. The person who strives to free slaves (successfully I might add!) is most definitely less racist than the one who kept those slaves.