jakewalker

Strongly prefer NetNewsWire, which is free and open source. www.netnewswire.com. Available on Mac and iOS.

He addresses this in footnote 1 on the same page, though. "A different company, Sun, created the library. But because Oracle later purchased Sun, for simplicity I refer to both companies as Oracle."

Sounds kinda like the people who thought that bundling a bunch of bad mortgage debt together in slices could get it rated AAA.

Plaintiffs' class action (mostly securities) lawyer here. I have no idea what you are talking about.

Not unilaterally, without any process.

He does not. Which doesn't make the headline inaccurate. But he does not have that authority, and no one right-thinking believes that he does.

Absolutely not. It's not remotely a thing, and would not withstand any scrutiny whatsoever.

That may be part of it, but Starbucks has done a very good job of getting their regular customers to sign up for their loyalty program and online/app ordering, and to have them sign up for automatically replenishing (every time my balance goes below $10, load another $25) gift card accounts to use both features.

We use Nest cams for a baby/child monitor at nighttime. Haven’t seen the change yet, but I suspect it will make it so that this use case no longer works.

The Big Dig in Boston was full of the same overruns, delays, and even corruption. All worth it.

It's the best thing the city has ever done, far and away. Fundamentally changed the city and is responsible for incalculable property value and quality of life improvements in the city.

why would it be a "donation"? DDG isn't a charity.

"Rumours of my acquisition are completely false. My humans and I are happily independent and plan to remain so."

https://twitter.com/1Password/status/1016710603359096846

No it isn't.

http://repository.law.umich.edu/mlr/vol107/iss4/1/

And there are multiple inaccuracies in all of these replies.

Lotus Improv was one of the best programs I've ever used, and I wish it would come back in a modern form. It was much more sophisticated than just having "names" instead of row/column coordinates. It had an easier to use and in some ways more powerful version of PivotTables. Man, I miss Improv.

The standards for adequately pleading a securities fraud lawsuit -- which this was -- are incredibly high, and the plaintiff has to meet that standard without access to any discovery from the Defendant (here, Yelp). Which is all a way of saying that it is extremely difficult to read too much into the dismissal of a securities fraud lawsuit.

The judge in this case was basically concluding that plaintiff -- a Yelp investor -- could not adequately allege in his complaint that Yelp or its executives made a false statement of material fact in connection with the sale of a security. And plaintiff had an extremely high burden to survive such a motion to dismiss because of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Private_Securities_Litigation_...).

So, in short, there is very little that one can conclude about Yelp's actual practices (for better or for worse) from learning that a securities lawsuit like this was dismissed.

Thanks very much for sharing. Do you know more about its source?

There were a number of lawsuits that were filed against Lenovo as a result of Superfish. I believe the Joint Panel For Multidistrict Litigation will soon (May 28) hear argument about whether and where those cases should be consolidated for pre-trial matters. See: http://www.jpml.uscourts.gov/sites/jpml/files/Hearing%20Orde...

There is a doctrine called "constitutional avoidance" - if a court can decide a case on grounds without reaching a constitutional question (particularly a close question), it ought to decide the case on the alternative grounds and avoid the constitutional question.

So, for example, a court might say: This action was improper because it was not authorized by Congress. That is all we need to decide. Because we made this decision, we don't need to reach the constitutional question. Of course, if Congress had authorized this action (or now does so), and this case is back before us, we will no longer be able to take that path. We may, at that time, decide that the congressionally-authorized action is unconstitutional. But because there is no need to do reach that decision at this time, we decline to do so.

Read more here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Constitutional_avoidance

Thanks. We represent the plaintiffs on a pro bono basis. Actually, almost a dozen law firms are donating their time to these cases (after class certification was denied, the workers were required to bring their lawsuits individually). It is tremendously rewarding work, and for me a great opportunity to take on responsibility I might not otherwise get at this stage of my career.

I have had the great pleasure of helping represent a group of these workers (not the folks who just recently went to trial, but another related case in the Eastern District of Louisiana). One of the most gratifying experiences I've had as an attorney. Really glad to see this story getting attention here.

If you are interested in the topic, I'd highly recommend taking a look at some of the SPLC's work on the issues surrounding the H2B program generally: http://www.splcenter.org/get-informed/publications/close-to-...