Difference between revisions of "Talk:1150: Instagram"

Explain xkcd: It's 'cause you're dumb.
Jump to: navigation, search
(Another xkcd which neglects all aspects of an issue. I swear, Randall is becoming a Republican!)
 
Line 1: Line 1:
 
Randall completely ignores the fact that "Chad" offered to store people's stuff for free and with no problems.  That's how "Chad" ended up with a garage full of stuff.  That's why the sudden notice that "Chad" was going to sell the stuff upset all those people.  The hover text neglects to mention whether or not the people across the street are also offering to store people's stuff for free.[[Special:Contributions/96.233.16.30|96.233.16.30]] 10:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 
Randall completely ignores the fact that "Chad" offered to store people's stuff for free and with no problems.  That's how "Chad" ended up with a garage full of stuff.  That's why the sudden notice that "Chad" was going to sell the stuff upset all those people.  The hover text neglects to mention whether or not the people across the street are also offering to store people's stuff for free.[[Special:Contributions/96.233.16.30|96.233.16.30]] 10:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)
 +
 +
----
 +
 +
Please note that a lot of people thought the new ToS allowed Instagram to sell their pictures but this is a misunderstanding of these ToS. This explanation should be slightly reworded in that sense. See http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/12/18/instagram_privacy_uproar_why_it_s_absurd_in_three_nearly_identical_sentences.html

Revision as of 11:08, 21 December 2012

Randall completely ignores the fact that "Chad" offered to store people's stuff for free and with no problems. That's how "Chad" ended up with a garage full of stuff. That's why the sudden notice that "Chad" was going to sell the stuff upset all those people. The hover text neglects to mention whether or not the people across the street are also offering to store people's stuff for free.96.233.16.30 10:39, 21 December 2012 (UTC)


Please note that a lot of people thought the new ToS allowed Instagram to sell their pictures but this is a misunderstanding of these ToS. This explanation should be slightly reworded in that sense. See http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2012/12/18/instagram_privacy_uproar_why_it_s_absurd_in_three_nearly_identical_sentences.html