a common point of confusion:
Uncategorized
5
Posts
5
Posters
0
Views
-
a common point of confusion:
A corporation agreeing to settle a lawsuit with money does not mean that the allegations were conclusively proven. It means they hit the “fine fine here’s some money to compensate for your troubles, please shut up” escape button. These concepts may have overlap, but they are not the same.
In particular, a company may agree to settle over something that isn’t really true, because the amount of sensitive internal information they’d have to disclose at the court’s orders to PROVE it’s not true would do more damage than just sighing and forking over the money.
It also might just be true and they know it! But not necessarily.
-
a common point of confusion:
A corporation agreeing to settle a lawsuit with money does not mean that the allegations were conclusively proven. It means they hit the “fine fine here’s some money to compensate for your troubles, please shut up” escape button. These concepts may have overlap, but they are not the same.
In particular, a company may agree to settle over something that isn’t really true, because the amount of sensitive internal information they’d have to disclose at the court’s orders to PROVE it’s not true would do more damage than just sighing and forking over the money.
It also might just be true and they know it! But not necessarily.
@0xabad1dea but most of the time it's true
not necessarily always, but often it just is
-
a common point of confusion:
A corporation agreeing to settle a lawsuit with money does not mean that the allegations were conclusively proven. It means they hit the “fine fine here’s some money to compensate for your troubles, please shut up” escape button. These concepts may have overlap, but they are not the same.
In particular, a company may agree to settle over something that isn’t really true, because the amount of sensitive internal information they’d have to disclose at the court’s orders to PROVE it’s not true would do more damage than just sighing and forking over the money.
It also might just be true and they know it! But not necessarily.
@0xabad1dea
Plus, the money will be single digit amounts to each user, assuming it's not just a discount coupon for future service.The company doesn't fell punished, as it's nothing compared to what they earned off their misdeeds - effectively an operating cost, and they'll continue offending.
The lawyers, though? They're doing great.
-
a common point of confusion:
A corporation agreeing to settle a lawsuit with money does not mean that the allegations were conclusively proven. It means they hit the “fine fine here’s some money to compensate for your troubles, please shut up” escape button. These concepts may have overlap, but they are not the same.
In particular, a company may agree to settle over something that isn’t really true, because the amount of sensitive internal information they’d have to disclose at the court’s orders to PROVE it’s not true would do more damage than just sighing and forking over the money.
It also might just be true and they know it! But not necessarily.
@0xabad1dea In English law at least the phrase "without prejudice" is very important, and many people don't get it. "We are specifically not admitting anything, but we are making you this offer anyway."
-
a common point of confusion:
A corporation agreeing to settle a lawsuit with money does not mean that the allegations were conclusively proven. It means they hit the “fine fine here’s some money to compensate for your troubles, please shut up” escape button. These concepts may have overlap, but they are not the same.
In particular, a company may agree to settle over something that isn’t really true, because the amount of sensitive internal information they’d have to disclose at the court’s orders to PROVE it’s not true would do more damage than just sighing and forking over the money.
It also might just be true and they know it! But not necessarily.
@0xabad1dea So like if Coca-Cola settled with the guy who RE'd their recipe, so they wouldn't have to reveal theirs in court and keep it a secret, despite the RE?
-
undefined oblomov@sociale.network shared this topic
Feed RSS
Gli ultimi otto messaggi ricevuti dalla Federazione
-
Una tavola di lookup è cosciente?
@aitech - Un interessante punto di vista filosofico, pensando agli attuali LLM
-
Aaand I'm back at work again after an amazing weekend at #FOSDEM 🥲
-
Preparo
il pasto per il crasto.
Il suo gusto non fa testo,
non è vasto al punto giusto
(non tocchiamo questo tasto).
Oggi pasta con il pesto:
visto il costo, direi basta.
Tosto arriva e mette a posto,
mangia lesto seppur mesto,
ché dobbiamo fare presto.
-
Memes For Monday: Old Paintings | beetleypete
Source: Memes For Monday: Old Paintings | beetleypete
http://nedhamsonsecondlineviewofthenews.com/2026/02/02/memes-for-monday-old-paintings-beetleypete/
-
I didn't think I was going to make it. I had put off doing homework last week because of travel, and I didn't start working on my assignment until yesterday afternoon after my last FOSDEM responsibilities. There was more work than I expected. I went out for supper yesterday evening with Fediverse friends, and didn't get home again till 11pm. But I got a few hours sleep, woke up and started grinding. I even took an hour off for breakfast. Finished my problem set and quiz with minutes to spare.
-
The Weight of a Millimeter
A distracted driver, a motorcycle crash, and the terrifying wait to see if I would ever walk again.
https://my-notes.dragas.net/2026/02/02/the-weight-of-a-millimeter/
#MyNotes #Blogging #Life #Reflections #Memories #Blogging #WiFi #Hacking
-
Le previsioni del tempo mettono tempestoso incazzone andante 🌩️
-
RE: https://mastodon.gamedev.place/@eniko/115997862376195752
aha! i figured it out! DOS mode X 256x224 is really just 320x240 with padding
BUT, if i use VESA 640x480 then 128x96 actually scales cleanly, with each pixel being 5x5
so for DOS i can do that with 256x224 as a fallback
i've finally completely figured out my retro hardware universal framebuffer display mode for my Bismuth VM
