Unless it’s ruled and a precedent is set, the statement is false.

They believe that the users agreed to a contract that specifies that in any dealings with Disney they’ve agreed to binding arbitration.

What’s the “false statement” there?

It could be changed at any time, it might not resolve properly, the page could be hijacked, an ad blocker could decide it’s an ad and show something else instead…

That was something Disney Lawyers claimed, but was never actually agreed/enforced.

Disney backed down. They still believe they have that right, and no court has ever said they didn’t, but the bad publicity was too much for them in this case. They’ll wait until there’s a case that doesn’t get that kind of publicity before they try to establish that precedent.

You aren’t internet.

The EULA isn’t null and void, but it’s pretty meaningless. Not because you can’t reasonably be expected to copy that link into a browser to read it, but because there’s no indication that you should or even must do that.

The EULA contains no terms, it doesn’t contain any wording saying what you can or can’t do. It doesn’t say what your rights are. It just contains something that looks like a URL. So, you’re still bound by the terms of the EULA (as much as you’re bound by any EULA) but the EULA doesn’t permit or forbid anything. It’s effectively the same as if it were blank.

They’re bound to the EULA, but the EULA is meaningless because it’s just a URL. They’re definitely not bound by whatever’s at that URL.

This would be like having someone sign a contract when the contract was just a shopping list. Sure, they’re bound by the “contract”, but the contract doesn’t specify anything they can or can’t do.

Mmmmmmm baking engineer…

How do you know? Apparently you’re not capable of reading the label!

So, despite the ingredients being listed, you’re still confused? Do you have a brain injury?

Barely any information on it? My guy, are you blind?

in the EU with “honey blend” you’d expect a blend of different types of honey

And, in the US you’d expect it to be something blended with honey. Different expectations, neither one of those expectations is unreasonable.

as it wouldn’t be allowed to be call honey unless it was pure honey

Right… and it’s not called honey, it’s called “Texas Honey Blend”. If it were honey it would be called “Honey”.

Having to decipher “made with real honey” to mean “its not real honey” is just fucking odd.

You don’t have to “decipher” that, you just have to look at the fact it’s a blend, not honey. The “made with real honey” is just additional confirmation that yes, it’s not pure honey.

Flip it over and look at the ingredients and its just a list? Why no percentages?

Because different food rules? Why percentages?

Gourmet stuff comes in all sorts of weird packaging

Gourmet stuff doesn’t come in bear-shaped plastic bottles.

No rules for food labelling is wild.

It would be, if it were the case. But, that’s definitely not the case here. It’s just different from the rules you’re used to. The core of your comment seems to be “this is different than what I’m used to, and I’m shocked!”

It isn’t that bad.

It says “made with real honey”, which is a pretty big clue that it isn’t real honey.

It says “texas honey blend”, again indicating that it’s honey blended with something.

And, as for “gourmet” it’s in a plastic bear-shaped container, it’s not a luxury item.

If people want to buy stuff made from high fructose corn syrup, shouldn’t they be allowed to do it? How much more obvious does it need to be that this isn’t pure honey?

I don’t know of any company that just runs mail servers. If you’re running your own mail server, you’re likely doing it on a small virtual instance. Adding web to that is easy. If you want a web frontend for email, there are plenty of options, although personally I just use IMAP.

The whole reason that Google exists today is that their PageRank algorithm was a great way to identify good content. At its basics, it worked by counting the number of pages that linked to a certain page. More incoming links meant the page was more useful. It didn’t matter how many relevant search terms you stuffed into your page. What matters was votes from other people, expressed in the form of linking to your page.

But, that algorithm failed for 2 reasons. One is that it became cheaper and easier to put up sites that linked to sites you wanted to promote. The other was that people stopped blogging on their own blogs, and stopped creating their own websites, and instead used walled gardens like Facebook, Twitter, Reddit, etc. That meant it was hard to measure links back to a site, and that it was easier to create fake links.

So, now it’s a constant war of SEO people vs. Google Search Quality people, and the Google people are losing. Sometimes there are brief victories for Google which result in good Reddit results appearing higher up. Then the SEO people catch up and either pollute Reddit and/or push Reddit links off the first page.

It would all be really depressing even if it weren’t for generative AI being used to pollute everything. With LLMs coming in and vomiting their content all over everything, we might be forced back to the bad old days of Yahoo where some individual human curated lists of good things and 99% of content was invisible.

I run my own mail server. It’s a pain in the ass and I don’t recommend it. But, trust isn’t really the issue, and the only certs I use are from Let’s Encrypt.

Yeah, but it’s bullshit and I’m calling it out, and I’ll continue to call it out, so stop it.

807 is too big for a typical auditorium.

Imagine an auditorium filled to capacity with people standing at the back and crouching in the rows. At the front of the auditorium a Microsoft spokesman is saying “Ok partners, here’s the confidential data. Make sure nobody shares it beyond this room. Ok, so David wrote a letter to his mother Nancy on March 2nd, which included the keywords ‘prostate’, ‘cancer’ and ‘diagnosis’. If you’d like to use those words to show David some ads, go right ahead – but make sure nobody beyond this room knows this confidential information. Next up is Martha…”

800ish entities is not “partners”.

“Partners” are people you could invite to site around a conference table with you. For it to be a partnership, you need to be able to have a meaningful discussion among all the different partners. 800ish is even too big for an auditorium where you’re presenting to all your “partners”. 800ish is a small arena.

Those aren’t partners.

That would be great, as long as “pay monthly” was guaranteed surveillance-free.

Nobody should be buying single use bottles anyway if there are alternatives available.

Are there alternatives available for carbonated beverages? I guess we could go back to glass bottles. But, they’re effectively single-use too.

We’ve come a long way, so that it’s normal to take a thermos to a coffee shop and have them put a tea or a coffee in it. I don’t know of any similar scheme for carbonated beverages. I’d love it if it existed, especially if you could keep your soda-pop cold for hours.