marahmarie: For those who've passed (candle)

I don't normally do this - light a candle for someone I never heard of before they died - but she sounds like she was an unusually caring and thoughtful judge. Out of the five people I'd want to meet in heaven, I'd definitely have to fit her in, somewhere.

marahmarie: Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell (Default)

What with how my DW tags are an eye-crossing experience and my CSS is incapable of separating post security fact from fiction because That's Not How This Works, MM™? Looks like it's pretty much sorted. I have no new suggestions to make thanks to the ingenuity of other DWers, so now it's just a matter of waiting for my wishes to bubble up through the pipes.

My top 3 picks for "If these get implemented then I think I'll be OK"

The following were "migrated", which I think means "submitted to the bugtracker"

My additional picks for "If these were implemented, then I might've been OK"

The following were "rejected" or marked "exists"

marahmarie: Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell (Default)

That'd be like some site translating their TOS into French and saying, "OK, but if you read and accept the terms in the new French version then PSYCH HAPPY APRIL FOOL'S DAY FRENCH VERSION ISN'T REAL JK YOU SMELL GO AWAY".

Maybe some War of The International Lawyers took place. Russian lawyers: "Our site is for Russians. It's in Russia. It's in Russian. Only Russian TOS is valid!" US lawyers: "A tremendous amount of your userbase resides in the US and other English speaking countries, so the TOS must be available in English." Russian lawyers, pouncing upon the word "available": "Fine, TOS will be in English! But only valid in Russian!" US lawyers: *cursing, stomping out*

Imagine DW tries this - we start to offer two TOSes: one in English, one in Russian (we have a growing Russian userbase, so while it's not inconceivable, it's still pretty unlikely - but don't you never say never). But PSYCH HAPPY APRIL FOOL'S DAY RUSSIAN VERSION ISN'T REAL JK YOU SMELL GO AWAY

The thing is, I don't think that's even possible under US/English common law. The TOS could be in 99,473 languages, three of them Martian, and it would still be binding, as long as it was the same TOS. If it was a different TOS (what I suspect happened over at LJ with the English version - that it's different from the Russian) ETA2, 4-13-17: it's the same TOS; see darkoshi's response and the link they add for further reading, then in the US what would happen next is we'd have one big lawsuit to determine which TOS, if any, might turn out to be the valid and legal one.

At least, I think that's how it would work. But I'm not sure they covered this in high school Business Law, which I took approximately five bajillionty years ago, so don't quote me!


ETA, same night: Having an "Oh, I get it" moment, I think: maybe they mean it's only valid as it applies to Russian law, so the parts of it that wouldn't be legal ("valid") under Russian law anyway will simply remain "invalid", so if the English TOS allows anything legal in the US that's illegal to do in Russia (such as posting pro-LBGTQIA content) then it's still illegal to do on LJ - from any country - no matter which TOS you're looking at. But rather than say, "Our law beats US and all other law because we said so" they say, "Only our Russian TOS is valid".

OK, so let's reverse this (I'm about to offer a completely nonsensical example): say talking about BitCoin is illegal in the US but not illegal in Russia. Bizarre, but let's just say, and DW has - in this non-existent, completely fictitious example that contains some completely non-existent things - two TOSes, one written in English, one in Russian. DW's servers sit in the US, and the userbase mostly speaks English, so our TOS says, "Talking about BitCoin is illegal, so don't do it" but the Russian TOS says, "Talk about BitCoin until you go blue in the face!"

Obviously, the Russian TOS rule about BitCoin is illegal in the US under the nonsensical law I just passed without an act of Congress, so it can't (or probably shouldn't be, if DW's owners wish to avoid trouble) be done by any DW user - from any country. So in any situation where our TOS, as written in Russian, allows illegal activity as defined by the US, nothing changes - that thing will still be illegal to do.

Which - if that's the case - sort of makes sense, but if so then holy shit, why didn't LJ just say so.

ETA2: though I've crossed out the now-irrelevant parts, this isn't a settled question for me. What about BitCoin being illegal to discuss here but not there? I do wonder which TOS and which laws would take precedence in that case, or if both TOSes would be struck down as "invalid" simply for not saying the same thing to all users. Which country would have the authority to strike either TOS down? *jumps down rabbit hole*


In US, you read TOS. In Russia, TOS reads you (bad, bad fucking joke - I wish there were better ones for this)

ETA2, 4-13-17: based on darkoshi's response and the link they add for further reading my first ETA appears to come to the right conclusion - with the big difference being that the TOS does say the same thing in either language but how it's interpreted could depend upon how it translates from one language to the other, so SUP apparently decided the Russian version should take precedence, probably because SUP's servers are now sitting over in Russia.

marahmarie: Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell (Default)

The Importer's been kind of blowing up? So please, if anyone can jump in there so I can submit my own (comparatively unimportant) questions and have a reasonable chance of being answered before even more of my hair turns grey, that would be awesome.

marahmarie: Sheep go to heaven, goats go to hell (Default)

ETA, 4-12-17: updated with new post; doing ETAs was too complicated.

And this is where both Dreamwidth search and my tags would've failed me: the word "eBay" wasn't in the title of one post, and neither had "eBay" listed as the tag (nope, the tag chosen for both - apparently after I threw a dart at it, blindfolded - was "experiential", my fancy term for "completely uncategorized but might wander off into the personal". Except even that's not a good way to find the unfindable because sometimes I don't use that tag, or I use one related to the subject matter but not the main point of it, or I don't add any tags at all).

Again, if there was some handy-dandy way to parse public from protected posts that gave a list of results for each parameter (I'm not even sure it would have to be tied into tags, but to have both - tag + security or just security - would be better) as opposed to scrolling through pages of posts to find titles that sort of sound like what I'm looking for, would cut both time and my anxiety and confusion, which only makes me more forgetful, since these things tend to snowball in on themselves once finding lost posts becomes a time-consuming PITA.

Which leads to me making more mistakes, which is a rabbit hole I promise y'all don't want to go down.

While I do enjoy hunting things down (online or off), you can pretend I never told any of y'all that as far as hunting things down on my DW goes, because I hate not being able to (instantly) find whatever's on it (a topic I apparently need to re-familarize myself with).

[staff profile] denise is still holding one suggestion of mine in queue (the suggestion is on a totally unrelated subject) so I'm debating whether to stack another suggestion about this topic on or wait until the last suggestion clears (don't quote me, but this time I'm pretty sure it clears). And I'm not sure what the new suggestion should be, and also not sure which version of said suggestion I'm 100% sure I posted last time around, nor whether it got published or rejected, so I think I should look through my previous posts on Suggestions, read other people's similar ones, and check out how searching posts by tag/security works on Wordpress and other shared social media sites before I write some new idea up for DW (update, 4-12-17: Denise is still holding the same suggestion in queue. The rest of this is expanded upon in my next post).

But right now I'm going pretty strong on lists: ie, what you get on editjournal or with Search, so my idea might build off that (I dislike using URL parameters because I don't want to see posts results, I want to see results with lists of posts, so they're out of the running, pretty much).

marahmarie: When words won't suffice, there's always facial expressions (glare)

Since he thinks it's so appropriate to use foul language even while serving as Orangado's Senior Adviser, I will too: Stephen K. Bannon absolutely needs to get the fuck out of the White House. He's not mentally fit to begin with and is a national security risk for that reason.

Him standing down from the National Security Council changes nothing. He's still the Trump Whisperer - nothing's changed, no one is fooled.

Kushner is someone I'd have trouble throwing water on if he was on fire but that doesn't change the fact that everyone in the White House should treat each other with dignity and respect. Calling Kushner a "cuck" - an insulting, derogatory term that denotes a white man who likes to watch his wife cheat upon him, sexually - usually with a black man - is not treating him with dignity or respect. Saying he feels "shived" just ices that cake for me.

He needs to go.

Polls are taken every week: how popular is the President? How much do you like him, how good of a job is he doing? Well, why does no one ever do the "How embarrassed are you by him?" poll? What do you think the numbers would look like on that? I cringe to think what other countries/peoples think with him in his stolen position of power. This poll, if it's ever taken, would probably reflect as much for many, many others, perhaps a majority.

And now you have this overwrought flying monkey going on about "cucks" and "shivs", in an ode to how two-bit the Oval Office has become, with a racist, bigoted, Breitbart-running white supremacist inside of it. That idea's not working out so well - is it?

No class, no class, no class, no class, no class.