The username is the joke.
I’m not putting in more effort than you clowns unless I feel like it lol
Looks like this guy was trying to do something in Cyprus but forced home, arrested in 2025, and now having his assets seized.
Must not have been on board with the war in the beginning https://www.reuters.com/markets/europe/russias-rusagro-loses-third-its-value-after-moshkovich-detained-2025-03-27/
By Febru…
it was 96%
useful little excerpt:
Students started off with 10 minutes of sustained silent reading. By February, they could do 30 minutes without any trouble. In the beginning, some students could barely write half a page. Now they were writing six to seven pages.
some color commentary by me:
Tech rots your brain. All these big companies operate on dopamine rushes and addiction to fuel their advertisement and surveillance empires. They’re getting rich while the rest of us suffer the consequences of largely unregulated social media.
Citizens united paved the way for this stuff to be top tier brainwashing too, since we mostly see the outputs of their algorithms which can be manipulated to align to whatever viewpoint they would like. Advertising is master manipulation in practice.
I mean it’s a very simple thing. Each sentence does not invalidate or preclude the one after or before it, all statements can be true without conflict.
From the article:
the SSD maker offered to refund him the original $330 he paid for the drive
so they are offering his original purchase price.
Section D states without any conditions for it to apply:
in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product.
This is a carte blanche statement capping the total dollar value of the warranty at the price originally paid. It’s no less valid than section B outlining the terabytes written and years after purchase as limiting factors of when the warranty applies. This sentence is literally the reason why they are offering the original purchase price of $330 and not one cent more. They do not offer to refund today’s purchase price of 1099.99 on their website (assuming he bought it directly from them) because they don’t have to.
If they offered a model that was in the grid as being 0.1TB written or 1 year, the warranty would only be that long. B is establishing those limits, even though the product has a warranty those conditions apply for the warranty and it’s remedies to be effective. It doesn’t limit the scope of the remedy, but it does limit the conditions of which the warranty applies. The warranty as described in section A is specifically worded to be broad and then limited by all other conditions in the warranty agreement.
Section A is effectively saying they exclusively choose the remedy from the available options: A refund no more than the market value (which is limited in section D to the purchase price) or a replacement.
If they had opted to choose to refund him and the product had dropped in price from $330 to $50, they could opt to provide a $50 refund as that is the new market value and also under their liability limit.
I started off on here with a comment saying the entire system is setup to screw consumers and give them the best benefit. It’s true. It’s just not done in a plain way and easily confused by those not carefully reading the entire fairly brief agreement.
edit: another way to think about how legal agreements work is to change the formatting so that every single whole sentence is a bullet point under section headings. The clauses can stand alone unless they’re very ambiguous. There’s no ambiguity here, there’s an actual purchase price and a limit being imposed. It doesn’t depend on anything else to be effective and it doesn’t just apply to a subset of scenarios. The only thing that seems to defeat it in the entire document is local laws.
you are lawyers
thanks man we know
you read English perfectly well.
thanks
see what I did there?
Remedy Description ≠ liability cap
Of course local laws apply, but then you’re relying on specific local or regional laws that somehow invalidate the agreement which probably don’t exist. You’re really in an uphill battle to argue that all of these sections of the warranty - the very thing you’re using to argue you are owed - do not apply to your case.
Your skin in the game is <$500 (for me, this 4TB ssd w/ heatsink is $793 at a local microcenter.) $500 is hardly more than an hour of lawyer time, odds are you’re paying at least $300 just for them to write a cease and desist, and now you’ve got to argue that your lawyer fees should be covered despite an arbitration clause, a jurisdiction clause, and a maximum liability clause. One of the best case scenarios is that you would pony up the cash and they give you a settlement that still doesn’t get you to a point where you have a working product or enough money to buy an identical item after lawyer fees. The worst case scenario is that you get absolutely nothing out of the suit and have to pay for arbitration fees on top of your legal fees.
How did you come to the conclusion that section D does not apply?
The agreement is the whole thing, not just part of it. Remember this is going to arbitration based out of korea and it has no severability clause. Odds are if you invalidate a part you’re invalidating the whole thing - but who knows, i’m not familiar with arbitration law out of seoul.
That is not a sentence, you took a sentence fragment. Very important distinction in a legal document.
Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade.
They are saying they are not liable for any implied warranties. The only warranty that is valid is the one defined in the document. They are not saying that section D does not apply to express warranties, as the next sentence talks about them in terms of limiting duration.
Reading is fundamental man.
I’m sure, and unless his lawyers can have section D struck from the agreement somehow I can’t imagine how he’s going to get them to pay him more than what he paid.
For normal people who don’t want to spend the time, effort and energy not to mention cash if you lose to sue I am not sure what relief you could suggest for them. I don’t see anything beyond the typical social media posts where you beg for somebody like GN to buy it from you or for their social media team to eat the cost of a replacement which is wholly unrealistic imo.
oh and their warranty has a fucking arbitration clause and puts it’s legal area in korea, that’s fun and another hurdle which is a total unknown to me how it will go down, but I would guess their arbitration can’t be much better for consumers than the US one.
This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the
Republic of Korea (excluding conflict of law’s provisions which may direct the application of
another jurisdiction’s laws). All disputes, controversies or claims between the parties arising
out of or in connection with this Agreement (including its existence, validity or termination)
shall be finally resolved by arbitration to be held in Seoul, Korea and conducted in English
under the Rules of Arbitration of the International Chamber of Commerce. The arbitral award
shall be final and binding on the parties. Except to the extent entry of judgment and any
subsequent enforcement may require disclosure, all matters relating to the arbitration,
including the award, shall be held in confidence.
You too! Please read it all!
D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability
Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
Please review section D of their warranty terms and conditions. It clearly states they are not liable for more money than the original purchase price:
D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability
Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
So yes, they will totally cover the cost of a replacement or refund of market value at the time of requesting the refund, but they are only liable for that purchase price. If the value goes above what you paid, they are not liable for providing the increased price. This is the having cake and eating it too. It’s worded to protect them the fullest, or if they decline to replace it later and it’s much cheaper for them to provide you with a market value refund, they will do so.
I need you to realize that you’re 100% wrong. Their warranty states that their liability will never exceed the purchase price of the product.
D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability EXCEPT FOR THE EXPRESS WARRANTIES STATED HEREIN, SAMSUNG DISCLAIMS ALL OTHER EXPRESS AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO ANY IMPLIED WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY, FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE, NONINFRINGEMENT, COURSE OF DEALING AND USAGE OF TRADE. ALL EXPRESSED AND IMPLIED WARRANTIES ARE LIMITED IN DURATION TO THE LIMITED WARRANTY PERIOD. THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINS SAMSUNG’S ENTIRE LIABILITY AND YOUR EXCLUSIVE REMEDY FOR BREACH OF THIS AGREEMENT. IN NO EVENT SHALL SAMSUNG, ITS SUPPLIERS OR ANY AFFILIATES BE LIABLE FOR ANY INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, INCIDENTAL OR SPECIAL DAMAGES, ANY FINANCIAL LOSS OR ANY LOST DATA OR FILES, EVEN IF SAMSUNG HAS BEEN ADVISED OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH DAMAGE AND NOTWITHSTANDING THE FAILURE OF ESSENTIAL PURPOSE OF ANY LIMITED REMEDY. IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT. THESE LIMITATIONS AND EXCLUSIONS APPLY TO THE FULLEST EXTENT PERMITTED BY APPLICABLE LAW.
They certainly have the capability of replacing the hardware but they know they have you over a barrel because they choose the winner, which is them!
They would just eat a few hundred bucks in unrealized profits… which they’re never gonna do willingly. They probably have an arbitration clause to prevent class action suits too because that’s what everybody lawful evil does these days.
edit: their warranty terms include a line that states:
IN NO EVENT WILL SAMSUNG’S LIABILITY EXCEED THE AMOUNT PAID BY YOU FOR THE PRODUCT.
In my experience essentially all amazon fraud returns that go into circulation end up getting a free replacement.
If you’re not returning a brick in place of a GPU and instead return the actual hardware, the next guy simply gets a DOA that looks like a DOA, quacks like a DOA, and returns like a DOA for another one… so the odds of this causing an actual issue for a normal human is extremely low.
Yeah, they know it’s cheaper to refund the purchase price rather than to provide a replacement. Why would they ever take the bigger loss to them? They’re businesses, not people with a conscious. They are legally required to make the most profit possible for their shareholders as they are both public entities. Publicly traded businesses are by definition lawful evil because this is the kind of world humanity gravitates towards.
I’m sure the warranty terms are worded in such a way that is most hostile to consumers and most beneficial to themselves. There’s always a half dozen legal gotchas that rarely apply in cases where they would lose a penny more than is typical like market shortages caused by AI infrastructure spend. The only time it makes financial sense for them to honor the warranty is if it’s cheaper than providing a refurbished replacement, and a refurb of these drives is likely worth much, much more than the original.
I’d say the play here is to buy a new one and return the old one but do a label swap. It’s certainly fraud, but then amazon or sandisk get to eat it instead of you. If you are concerned about how hard it hits their bottom lines, check out their stock valuation over the last year.
edit: section D of their published warranty clearly outlines that they are not liable for more than your purchase price:
D. Warranty Limitations and Limitations of Liability
Except for the express warranties stated herein, Samsung disclaims all other express and implied warranties, including but not limited to any implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, noninfringement, course of dealing and usage of trade. All expressed and implied warranties are limited in duration to the limited warranty period. This agreement contains Samsung’s entire liability and your exclusive remedy for breach of this agreement. in no event shall Samsung, its suppliers or any affiliates be liable for any indirect, consequential, incidental or special damages, any financial loss or any lost data or files, even if Samsung has been advised of the possibility of such damage and notwithstanding the failure of essential purpose of any limited remedy. in no event will Samsung’s liability exceed the amount paid by you for the product. these limitations and exclusions apply to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law.
I love the series, especially XCX even though it doesn’t look like they’re revisiting it any time soon.
The combat is kinda casual mmorpg tier when you’re mid-lategame. It’s similar to having perhaps a third of the moveset of lancer in FFXIV once you get going. Like sure, there’s some amount of positioning or build composition for the team, but it’s still very tiny compared to games with robust combat systems.
The game shines with the amazing, wondrous open worlds. Then there’s the characters with great personalities, and the stories that tie it all together. Plus the fairly robust post-game grind is enjoyable. There’s a lot to love, but definitely not the early to mid game combat for me anyway.
100%
Even many, many lemmy users believe there is a semblance of privacy on the internet today, or in national businesses with modern IP camera tech. It’s all gone.
They have enough telemetry to know who you are between all the details the browser gives them. Hell, most people don’t even know what a tracking pixel is or how it has been used for well over a decade.
We’re at the point with machine learning that the resources required to process all of these datapoints is trivial even when done onboard fairly cheap devices.
affects mobile the most obviously… but google’s playbook is to basically have forced telemetry always and enforce integrity of their telemetry, and by extension advertising etc.
https://piunikaweb.com/2026/05/07/google-recaptcha-play-services-requirement/ - this just seems like an ok article for it, I did a simple web search and it came up, but others certainly exist if you dislike the source.
Probably just a dip is kinda expected. They’ve powered through countless things that would have caused a rout before. I expect the administration to announce some bullshit grift to prop it up if it actually continues.
So trailer generators can be there for 1 year while they are exempt from emissions
What’s stopping them from simply shuffling around generators from one state to another or one site to another and indefinitely ignoring emissions?
Take this another step. This is tennessee. Someone should buy some property next to some of the people in power enabling this and setup as many as possible to run 24x7x365 next door. There’s no problems for a whole year right?