Re: "I have a hard time believing"
Forgot the sarcasm tag, didn't you?
1193 publicly visible posts • joined 16 Jan 2016
Spitting out verbatim (too large a chunk of) an article can be a copyright violation.
Repeating information from that article, using a different form of words - and especially if combined (even badly) with information gleaned from another source, is not.
So, theoretically, if I'd get my hand on Windows source code, remove all the bugs, telemetry and useless crap, add a lot of impovements, it wouldn't be a copyright violation, right? After all, I'd be cutting it down to under 50% so it won't be a too large chunk of it.
Why is it always the lowest common denominator that gets catered to?
They vote as they are told.
Maybe M$ should simply have an "I'm an idiot" tickbox at installation time, the result of which Windows can use to determine whether such "conveniences" are enabled or disabled by default.
Care to bet they will install every crap under the sun if you tick that box? For your convenience, of course. And, if you don't tick it, they will install it anyway, for your convenience.
I wonder if all those politicians have even heard of video conferences. You know, when you settle your arse in your favorite chair, wearing only your briefs and a shirt with tie, looking into a camera and speaking into a microphone.
They don't fucking need to meet in person. Think of the savings in fuel, food, services, drugs, hookers, booze and so on they can save.
EU: you're big, so we'll impose a large fine but don't worry, we won't collect it. Oh, and if we can come to an agreement we'll reduce the fine. But no worries, we still won't collect it.
USA: you're big, so we'll have you pay a small ammount, recognise you've done nothing wrong and carry on.