Awesome. What prompt did you use?

No, that was John McAffee.

The problem is that the legal definition of what is or isn’t emulation doesn’t necessarily have to coincide with the technical one. Any EULA can include a statement to the effect of “for the purposes of this Agreement, emulation is defined as such and such”, but even if they don’t, all the company would have to do is convince a judge, practically all of whom are total laymen when it comes to computer technology, that using WINE or virtual machines or whatever other emulation-adjacent technology counts as emulation or, alternatively, that even though they aren’t technically emulation, since they accomplish a similar purpose, they are implied by the use of the word “emulation” in the EULA.

Legalese is largely characterized by vomiting every synonym you can think of to make absolutely sure that they are all included in the text, but that isn’t a requirement. It’s just to avoid having to debate whether something was included or not. Unless it is either explicitly included or explicitly excluded, its implicit inclusion is up for debate in a court of law, and the last word belongs to a judge who can’t tell a smartphone from a network switch.

You’re asking for a blanket statement from me but giving specific examples.

Regarding what you said before the quote block, yes. My generic objection to EULAs would be lifted in this case.

Regarding the obviously objectionable example clauses in the block and after it, I am opposed to those but they are a reason to reject the particular EULAs which contain them, just like any contract which contains similar dispositions (imagine having to agree never to eat at Burger King when you buy a Big Mac).

My previous comment was about things that are generally wrong with the practice of EULAs because they have become a de facto standard, and was not meant to imply that those are the only things that can possibly be wrong with any EULA ever.

EULAs should be completely non-enforceable in a sane world. They are enormous, full of frivolous dispositions just to bloat them and discourage actual reading (like the infamous prohibition against using iTunes to help you build nuclear weapons) and rarely are they ever available before you’ve already purchased the software. Instead, they’re presented to you only as part of a setup program where the font is minuscule, Ctrl+F doesn’t work and which often doesn’t allow copying+pasting the EULA to a non-retarded text window somewhere else which actually allows you to read it comfortably, save it or even print it out. EULAs are a perfect example of contracting in bad faith and if any Law student anywhere ever created a EULA-like document as part of a Civil Law assignment, they would get a failing grade automatically because no professor in their right mind is going to read more than two paragraphs into that obviously malicious bullshit with 50 other papers to grade.

Google can suck the shit directly from my asshole Human Centipede style if they think I’m ever going to pay them for.not using their monopoly to harass me. When I can no longer feasibly block ads on YouTube, I’ll just move to another platform. Thank goodness they’re about to lose Chrome because otherwise they’d soon be injecting ads directly through the browser just like they do in their shitty news app.

Trump will absolutely push for peace talks. If by “push for” you mean “tenderly fellate” and by “peace talks” you mean “Vladimir Putin”.

It’s not ok to insult anyone. Why do you feel the need to do so, and why are you asking for permission?

But muh piracy!

Alternative title: how annoying people have adapted to not being able to annoy everyone as easily as before.

Yes, it is. But when the article’s title is bad, that’s more than enough reason to break convention.

Removed by mod

If you interpret these sayings as “just wait around without doing anything and the problem will fix itself”, then you’re missing the point. The point is that everything is always changing, and that includes the situations in our lives and how we feel about them.

When you’re at the bottom of a slump, it often feels like it’s going to stay that way forever. But this feeling is an objectively false view of reality. Reminding yourself that “this too shall pass” can help to cut back on the despair and allow you to focus on taking steps to prepare/help the healing process rather than just giving up because right now it seems like it’s pointless, life is suffering, God is a lie but the Devil is real, and everything will suck more and more forever.

He should. But no, you shouldn’t assume he does.

A better title would have been "Man arrested by FBI for SEC hack had searched ‘How to know for sure if you are being investigated by the FBI’."That would eliminate the incorrect implication.

You’re asking the wrong person. I’ve been disgusted by him ever since I had the misfortune of watching an episode of The Apprentice.

It would blow my mind even if his opponent had zero qualifications. The fact that she’s actually competent and charismatic just adds to the surreality of the situation.

Thankfully a lot has changed since then. Back then not even most Democrats thought he was as unhinged as he’s been acting in public since Kamala Harris took over the ticket.

I was wrong about who I was for several years. A pretty unexpectedly intense DMT trip set me right

EDIT: This isn’t really the ideal place to elaborate on my experience, but thanks for the interest.

In other words, the consent of a corporation is more important than the consent of a human being… for the public distribution of that human being’s likeness in an intimate context. Holy dystopia, conservatives are fucked in the head.