• Welcome to Smashboards, the world's largest Super Smash Brothers community! Over 250,000 Smash Bros. fans from around the world have come to discuss these great games in over 19 million posts!

    You are currently viewing our boards as a visitor. Click here to sign up right now and start on your path in the Smash community!

WI Thread

Wafles

Wafles

Smash Lord
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
1,379
Location
Appleton, Wisconsin
Toecutter said:
lawl @ anyone using chrome
Click to expand...
Do you believe everything you read in a blog?
Read the entire EULA yourself, and you'll see that what they're talking about is usage data from the browsers features. They not only have no way of truly verifying anything was made or posted from Chrome, but you can actually entirely disable sending them data from those features entirely via the options.

Not only that, but Google knows that this section looks a little bit hazy, and they're already modifying the wording of the EULA to make it clear that they have no intentions such as those assumed from sites like gizmodo.

Finally: EULA's never hold up in court anyway. If they were to try to claim ownership to anything you posted, you could sue their ***** and probably win.

Kids these days, believing anything they read on the internet.
 
OF 'til I OD

OF 'til I OD

More vibes, please.
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,603
Location
Wisconsin
3DS FC
3797-8618-3772
Switch FC
SW-4939-9118-0296
Wafles said:
Do you believe everything you read in a blog?
Read the entire EULA yourself, and you'll see that what they're talking about is usage data from the browsers features. They not only have no way of truly verifying anything was made or posted from Chrome, but you can actually entirely disable sending them data from those features entirely via the options.

Not only that, but Google knows that this section looks a little bit hazy, and they're already modifying the wording of the EULA to make it clear that they have no intentions such as those assumed from sites like gizmodo.

Finally: EULA's never hold up in court anyway. If they were to try to claim ownership to anything you posted, you could sue their ***** and probably win.

Kids these days, believing anything they read on the internet.
Click to expand...
1. lol

2. I didn't read it in any "blog"

3. How would it not hold up? You agreed completely to their conditions and terms. The UCITA exists to help and protect the business's product or service. If Wisconsin doesn't have UCITA, there is the UCC (2-204 - 2-606). Decisions are limited to particular provisions and terms, obviously. There is no proof that you did or didn't post it from? You're uniformed. Want your blacklists updated? Want plugins, addons, etc.? Not only that, if you use Google at all, everything you search they track, they use your IP which in turns means they know where you are. If you answered no, and run noscript, then sure. If you want your browser to be anything more than futile and out of date, they know what you're using. The blacklists and addons are provided by Google themselves.

4. Them editing and revising it (which they've already done), just goes to show you they were in the wrong, and expected far less of the vast majority of people (and they should, as most people are idiots, like yourself).The few who cared to read what they were agreeing to noticed and notified anyone with an IQ above 5.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-license-agreement/

Seems they just copypasted an old EULA in an attempt to avoid legal fees. That shows their care and concern for the future of Chrome and for the effort they put forward </sarcasm> They may have fixed it, but they were stupid enough to make the mistake in the first place. Everyone who spoke out against their words (mistake or not) had and has the right.

5. Anyone who uses "you could sue" as a basis for an argument automatically loses all credibility. Yes...let's go around suing people because it's just that easy. If the court chose not to throw the case out, who do you think would hold more repute? Some kid living in his mom's basement obviously looking for an easy way out (i.e. getting money from his government, taking it from those who have earned it, then subsequently squandering it on World of Warcraft) or one of the most heralded and "infallible" (not that I think that of them at all) companies in the world today? HMMMMMMMMMMMM


Kids these days are ****ing ******** and presumptuous as hell.

Things of interest:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=7th&navby=docket&no=961139
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/ucc.table.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4645596.stm


gb2WoW and eating those totinos that your mommy made for you
 
Wafles

Wafles

Smash Lord
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
1,379
Location
Appleton, Wisconsin
Toecutter said:
1. lol

2. I didn't read it in any "blog"

3. How would it not hold up? You agreed completely to their conditions and terms. The UCITA exists to help and protect the business's product or service. If Wisconsin doesn't have UCITA, there is the UCC (2-204 - 2-606). Decisions are limited to particular provisions and terms, obviously. There is no proof that you did or didn't post it from? You're uniformed. Want your blacklists updated? Want plugins, addons, etc.? Not only that, if you use Google at all, everything you search they track, they use your IP which in turns means they know where you are. If you answered no, and run noscript, then sure. If you want your browser to be anything more than futile and out of date, they know what you're using. The blacklists and addons are provided by Google themselves.

4. Them editing and revising it (which they've already done), just goes to show you they were in the wrong, and expected far less of the vast majority of people (and they should, as most people are idiots, like yourself).The few who cared to read what they were agreeing to noticed and notified anyone with an IQ above 5.

http://www.mattcutts.com/blog/google-chrome-license-agreement/

Seems they just copypasted an old EULA in an attempt to avoid legal fees. That shows their care and concern for the future of Chrome and for the effort they put forward </sarcasm> They may have fixed it, but they were stupid enough to make the mistake in the first place. Everyone who spoke out against their words (mistake or not) had and has the right.

5. Anyone who uses "you could sue" as a basis for an argument automatically loses all credibility. Yes...let's go around suing people because it's just that easy. If the court chose not to throw the case out, who do you think would hold more repute? Some kid living in his mom's basement obviously looking for an easy way out (i.e. getting money from his government, taking it from those who have earned it, then subsequently squandering it on World of Warcraft) or one of the most heralded and "infallible" (not that I think that of them at all) companies in the world today? HMMMMMMMMMMMM


Kids these days are ****ing ******** and presumptuous as hell.

Things of interest:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=7th&navby=docket&no=961139
http://www.law.cornell.edu/ucc/ucc.table.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/technology/4645596.stm


gb2WoW and eating those totinos that your mommy made for you
Click to expand...
Ugh, you made a much bigger deal out of the sue bit then I expected. I'm not as dumb as you think I am, but you did prove some points to me that I did not consider before.

Point being: Google doesn't want ownership of your stuff, that point is still valid.

Oh, and can you prove to me just how Google would know a blog post, or article you wrote was actually done through Chrome instead of just referencing other examples such as their web searching? Unless they find some basis to view the webservers internal records, I don't see any way that they can prove this, nor have I seen any sources stating that Google can actually see what you do via Chrome other than basic usage data pertaining to the various features in Chrome, and errors experienced, obviously to improve the service in the future.

There are sources of EULA's not holding up in court, obviously, and sources where they do. Maybe I balanced it unfairly in my post, but there's still a point to it.

On a side note:
http://www.pcpitstop.com/spycheck/eula.asp
 
OF 'til I OD

OF 'til I OD

More vibes, please.
Joined
Oct 21, 2005
Messages
2,603
Location
Wisconsin
3DS FC
3797-8618-3772
Switch FC
SW-4939-9118-0296
Point being: Google doesn't want ownership of your stuff, that point is still valid.
Click to expand...
Yes, I know this now, though it was completely fair for anyone who was upset over it to question it. Google had mistakenly listed it in their EULA. So they were at fault there.


Oh, and can you prove to me just how Google would know a blog post, or article you wrote was actually done through Chrome instead of just referencing other examples such as their web searching?
Click to expand...
Well, I don't really know how things like that work. I know about IP tracking, sending and receiving certain information through scripts, cookies, downloads, etc. :dizzy: Maybe there isn't, but I don't see why so many people would have noticed or cared about it if there wasn't some way of Google knowing if something was or wasn't posted by Chrome.

And yeah, like most things related to the Law and court, there would be occasions where they both do and do not hold up.

I suppose I did a big deal of it. I mean, I don't know. I wasn't completely serious to begin with. I wouldn't care if people choose to use Chrome or not, but I simply wouldn't have. I've always been somewhat wary of things similar to this (Big Brother type stuff >_>;;; ). Not overly concerned to an extreme or anything, though, either.

My insults, I assure you, were simply japes. :bee:
 
Wafles

Wafles

Smash Lord
Joined
Apr 17, 2008
Messages
1,379
Location
Appleton, Wisconsin
@lonejedi - You fail so hard it's unbelievable.

Well, I don't really know how things like that work. I know about IP tracking, sending and receiving certain information through scripts, cookies, downloads, etc. Maybe there isn't, but I don't see why so many people would have noticed or cared about it if there wasn't some way of Google knowing if something was or wasn't posted by Chrome.

And yeah, like most things related to the Law and court, there would be occasions where they both do and do not hold up.

I suppose I did a big deal of it. I mean, I don't know. I wasn't completely serious to begin with. I wouldn't care if people choose to use Chrome or not, but I simply wouldn't have. I've always been somewhat wary of things similar to this (Big Brother type stuff >_>;;; ). Not overly concerned to an extreme or anything, though, either.

My insults, I assure you, were simply japes.
Click to expand...
I am actually going to school right now as a computer science major, but eventually I intend to focus solely on backend web development. I've been making webpages since I was in 5th grade, and doing the back end scripting to more advanced websites for about 4 years now. I know how the internet works, and I know that google has no basis of proof to say that anything you made was using chrome unless you give them warrant to search through your servers access logs, which would be stupid, and I'm not even positive that the headers sent out by the browser give definitive proof of Chrome's usage.

Simply put, it was a mistake on Googles part, and they've already rectified it anyway.
 
chansen

chansen

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
1,750
Location
Madison, WI
not only have i recently beaten ff5 with my new piece of plastic. but i also purchased a 360, with lil SC4 and lil bit o NG2.
 
chansen

chansen

Smash Lord
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
1,750
Location
Madison, WI
i still laugh when i look at bils location

edit: I'm playing NG2 and there is a part where you are on a airship and while you are fighting youre female compadre is fighting outside. But there is a time when, over the loudspeakers, the enemy announces

"Explosives detected! One of the hostiles has an RPG. I'm going to try
and get a closer look. Let's see...it's a woman! A blonde woman! Alert
to all tac teams: SHE'S HOT!!!"
 
eighteenspikes

eighteenspikes

Smash Master
Joined
Dec 5, 2005
Messages
4,358
Location
Neenah, WI
ahhahahhaah check out these stupid ****in crybabies

some email I just got said:
Hello,
Another Cyberscore user has asked us to investigate one or more of your
submissions.

After checking them ourselves we have decided that further
investigation is neccesary.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

BLAST CORPS - NTSC
Salvage Wharf
http://www.cyberscore.net/chart-26304.php
PROOF REQUIRED
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom