Hypnoctopus

Is the article mentioned the criteria for a video? I don’t care enough about it to read the article. Can the video be like one of those YouTube shorts and and still be worth the 25 bucks?

I said I’m no pro and just spitballing, your last line about being a simp is pretty strange.

3 videos a day for 5.5 months (about 167 days). That’s 500 videos. 500 x $25 = $12500, not $1250.

I have no clue if it’s feasible to make three videos a day for 5.5 months, but I guess if the length of the video doesn’t matter then It must be doable.

It could be worth it if they can also make money through other companies for the same videos. Plus if they’re popular enough that Amazon is paying them then they must already be making ad revenue or something.

I don’t know. I’m not a pro, just spitballing.

The point is that news about Twitter rebranding is simply not related to technology. This is a technology community. These submissions should not even be posted in the first place to have the opportunity to be voted on.

The article says that according to the guy who sued him, he had accepted the terms of a contract through text message.

However, it doesn’t say that according to the guy that sued him, he had accepted a contract specifically through the sending of 👍 in a text message in the past.

The article did not say that he had ever used 👍 previously in text to accept a contract. It says that according to the guy who sued him, he had responded through text message in the past to accept a contract.

In this particular case the defendant had a history of using 👍to accept a contract. Had done it NP a dozen times before

The article doesn’t say that. It says that according to the guy who sued him, he used text message before to accept a contract. It doesn’t say that he had ever responded to a contract with a thumbs up emoji before.

“Mickleborough said the emoji amounted to an agreement because he had texted numerous contracts to Achter, who previously confirmed through text message and always fulfilled the order.”

No mention of thumbs up emoji having been used prior to this particular thumbs up emoji incident.

The article doesn’t say that. It says that according to the guy who sued him, he used text message before to accept a contract. It doesn’t say that he had ever responded to a contract with a thumbs up emoji before.

“Mickleborough said the emoji amounted to an agreement because he had texted numerous contracts to Achter, who previously confirmed through text message and always fulfilled the order.”

No mention of thumbs up emoji having been used prior to this particular thumbs up emoji incident. Are you referencing an alternate source?

What exactly does acceptance look like to you? He was offered a contract, gave it a thumbs up, and delivered the goods for the price specified in the contract. It would be ridiculous NOT to treat that as accepting the contract.

Will you clarify: “He was offered a contract, gave it a thumbs up, and delivered the goods for the price specified in the contract.”?

The article says he didn’t deliver the goods for the price after sending a thumbs up.

According to the article:

“Mickleborough said the emoji amounted to an agreement because he had texted numerous contracts to Achter, who previously confirmed through text message and always fulfilled the order.”

It does not say he accepted any contracts in the past using that emoji. It says that according to the guy who sued him, he has accepted contracts through text message.

Yes, I read it. Did you? It said:

“Mickleborough said the emoji amounted to an agreement because he had texted numerous contracts to Achter, who previously confirmed through text message and always fulfilled the order.”

It does not say that the argument was made that he previously agreed to a contract through text message _ by sending a single 👍_.

This is the context we have through the article, and so no, a single emoji as a binding contract is ridiculous.

You just said admitted to pirating, you little muppet.

Why would young people vote when they can stay at home and browse tiktok instead?

/s

It is completely absurd to rule an emoji as an agreement to a contract.