OsaErisXero

joined 8 months ago
[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (1 children)

I appreciate the commitment to the bit in the username

[–] [email protected] 2 points 5 months ago (1 children)

This is not precisely accurate. These are individually addressible and can be commanded to change what's displayed based on any arbitrary input, such as detection of a critical mass of apple products in that part of the store, or a device which is signed into a store account on the store app, accurate down to about 3 meters last time I looked at the state of presence analytics tech. So you absolutely could have 20% higher prices follow a person around a store if you wanted to.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago

Won't somebody please think of the shareholders

[–] [email protected] 9 points 5 months ago

A lot of risk narcing on someone irl

[–] [email protected] 4 points 5 months ago

I would imagine a production version of this would have predefined cut lines to pull a chunk out for working on stuff in or under the foundation

[–] [email protected] 23 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Well, so much for that

[–] [email protected] 6 points 5 months ago (1 children)

Nova got bought? Is that what happened to them? :(

[–] [email protected] 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) (7 children)

None that I'm aware of, but for a copyright to be asserted in the US a human must be associated with it as a consequence of the monkey selfie case. My reading is that this would cover the edge case of an anonymous, unknown poster submitting the work, allowing Cara to act as the default rights holder unless otherwise asserted by a person or user.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 5 months ago (9 children)

No, it doesn't. It states that the copyrighted works are the property of Cara and/or the artist who created the Works, except where otherwise noted. This specifically would cover cases where someone attempts to claim that a Work they found on Cara isn't copyrighted because a copyright notice wasn't explicitly stated, and doesn't make explicit claims over the ownership of any arbitrary Work. For it to work in the way you're claiming, the "or" cannot be present as it being there implies the existence of Works on the site which Cara does not have property rights to. Who actually possesses the property rights to any given Work is left, apparently intentionally, ambiguous.

[–] [email protected] 16 points 5 months ago (1 children)

See, the problem is that this all would have required retaining all those expensive engineers that were either terminated or bailed the second he got hands on the platform.

[–] [email protected] 17 points 5 months ago

Turns out when the ads are for things I want, at good prices and without all the nag and malware, they're beneficial for both consumer and advertiser. Advertising used to be a useful tool for both parties.

But enshitification must continue.

[–] [email protected] 29 points 6 months ago (1 children)

male'); DROP TABLE Gender;--

view more: ‹ prev next ›