Can a company market a submarine but then define a submarine as a lamp in their ToS and you'd just be out of luck?
I haven't read the case, but you seem to be coming from a place of "the terms absolve them" when the suit may be more about false advertising?
I am a premium subscriber and don't get a lot of ads, but I have also noticed some UX changes recently that do indeed seem kinda dark pattern/marketing-ish.
I will be mildly watching this hoping for that sweet $2.37 settlement check....
Because reading code isn't the same act as writing it.
It is way easier to miss a subtle issue when you are reviewing a bunch of code you didn't write than it is in code you actually wrote yourself using your own brain.
He wants you mad about this bullshit that won't fly so you ignore his abject failures in Iran and at home and that the Epstein class is still doing whatever it wants even though he promised he would "drain the swamp."
Are you the person who asked about all this in another thread?
You got a lot of good advice in that thread.
Try taking some of it instead of making memes.