News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Lenovo Statement on Superfish. Parent comment

Re:Lenovo Statement on Superfish by qzw on Thursday February 19, 2015 @03:31PM (#9076793)
Ok, I think you're assigning me to a camp in your head that I do not belong to. I'm not the corporation-loving, lawyer-hating, "tort-reforming" droid you're looking for. If you believe in the rule of law, which I do, then lawsuits are inevitable. There have been great lawsuits in history that have ensured freedom, ended injustice, and punished evil. But there have also been lawsuits used to bully, intimidate, and coerce. I assume you've heard of patent trolls? How about the SCO saga? How about the Scopes Monkey Trial? That's why I said I'm "ambivalent"[1] about them.

[1]http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ambivalent

[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Lenovo Statement on Superfish by x0x0 on Thursday February 19, 2015 @03:53PM (#9076964)
All of the above are a vast minority of lawsuits, and I read ambivalence as functionally equivalent to anti-tort. Again, you were ambivalent until your ox got gored.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Lenovo Statement on Superfish by quesera on Friday February 20, 2015 @12:47AM (#9079139)
You might have withheld your hostility if you had first double-checked the definition of "ambivalent".

It does not mean or imply "opposed" or "disdainful" or "disinterested", at all.

[ Parent | on HN ]