A hire rejection email. Idk, seems unlikely. Especially one that mentions a concrete reason for rejection.

This is why I assume this must be fake. Because even a trainee HR employee would look at that email, and not send it out.

The truth is, faceless datacenters run linux. PEOPLE run Windows.

No they don’t. Microsoft makes software. Outsourcing making software makes no sense.

I don’t know. It looks more aesthetically consistent. Your computer has to display something. Average users would be scared if it dumped logs on the display. so the vendor logo makes sense. It COULD just say loading, but this is a bit pedantic I think.

When companies fight regulations they use statements THIS unreasonable to fight better legislation, for framing everyone who supports better regulation, as completely unreasonable whining anti capitalistic bigots, who just want regulation that makes conducting any business basically impossible.

With this logic, if your DVD rots, does the company who originally released the DVD owe you a full refund plus interest?

Well yeah but that is hosted on various abandonware sites. If they defacto disown the rights of it, that is fair enough…

They will ALMOST CERTAINLY. But my point is this doesn’t really help… Let’s say a game I really like, I dunno Wreckfest (substitute you own idc) gets yanked from Steam. Here is my 24.99 EUR back. Okay fine, fair enough (it isn’t but whatever), where can I buy the game again? Well REALLY you can’t, you can either buy gamepass forever (Until it gets yanked from there again), or you can go and hunt down a rare an expensive Xbox physical release.

So have I been reimbursed for my loss? No, because the 24.99 is no substitute for the game I had and wanted.

This is what I wrote on the other thread about the same article. The question is, on what possible grounds are they allowed to revoke licenses for completed sales?

To be fair, Sony might go for that. This is incredibly embarrassing for them as well, and it does erode the trust in their service which is really important for a marketplace like this. Sony will be handing out coupons probably, but this is still damage to their brand.

I think when this happens you DO get a refund, (usually a coupon for the same service, but still). This is a situation where villanizing Sony would be, but not necessarily correct. Obviously they have no interest to remove previously purchased content from user libraries. (like this).

So the question is, on what possible grounds can a company change licensing AFTER sales have been made. This is the same fucking mess as with the soundtrack being retroactively removed from GTAIV. How is this legal?

From the standpoint of linux that is true.

Yeah but that is a situation that is funny in hindsight.

Until google announces that adblocks will be blanket removed from chromium as well. The truth is the only company big enough to maintain a fork this different, is Microsoft, the question is will they feel like they should, or will they side with Google, since this is by their interests as well…

There is incomparably more propaganda here then anywhere else. On reddit politics are kept out of most subs that are not specifically discussing politics, here everyone uses every opportunity to push whatever agenda they happen to have

I don’t think ADS were ever the problem. The problem was the ratio. ORIGINALLY adblock plus, when it was a relevant adblocker had an option to allow less obtrusive ads to show. The rules they set for themselves there was pretty reasonable.

Or even the taycan, It weighs 2 tonnes.

I mean somethimes for modern western people, putting things into perspective WOULD actually help.

It is also a good demonstration how realtive our happyness is. It is all about expectations.

No, not really. I get what you mean but the truth is, that unsustainable practices should’ve been capped, and made illegal BEFORE there was a monopoly. Now that there is one, they can do what they want. Google aren’t idiots. They know FULL well they can do this. All of this is calcualted.