Why are they surprised that someone who is highly sympathetic to sex offenders would want them to get away from their crimes.
Methinks that Elon would tote the security of a Tesla, but something tells me that if a sex offender or child kidnapper were to take it, the sensors would stop updating and it would release a lot of DNA destroying enzymes in the interior and exterior that would destroy crucial evidence inside and outside the vehicle.
This is a search engine showing open evidence of skewing results away from true for their own motivations. Slightly comic when it is Microsoft doing it to Google but if they do this so blatantly how else are they more subtly redirecting our searches towards biased or even false results that benefit them and misinform the user.
I agree that Honey is a sleazy extension, but should I be worried that if they lose, it will set a bad precedent? From the video, the Honey extension works by injecting a Honey referral code into all online shopping transactions, possibly overwriting whatever influencer referral code the user was under. If Honey loses, the court decision is likely to say that an extension creator is liable if they tamper with referral codes and tracking links.
This will be a problem for privacy extensions that strip out tracking cookies and referral URLs, since they are also messing with influencer attribution, though not for profit but at the request of the user.
Nah, honey was marketed as a coupon tool without mentioning the referral manipulation it did that is its actual business model. Those privacy extensions just need to call out that they remove referral trackers too and everything is fine with them.
That makes no sense. The problem is not that and extension is tampering with tracker links, it is that it is falsely attributing itself as a sales representative.
technology
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.