[QUOTE=Brian-E;353580]I think it's highly culture dependent, Ross.[/QUOTE]
Of course it is. But that is what a multinational corporation is supposed to pay attention to. They should not call a car "No-va" in Latin market nor should they expect to sell an expensive car called "Silver Mist" in a German one. [URL="http://www.i18nguy.com/translations.html"]Marketing Translation Mistakes[/URL]

[B]'Waterproof iPhone' ad hoax tricked users into destroying their handsets[/B]

[QUOTE]A hoax advert shared on social networking sites has tricked iPhone users into thinking the latest software upgrade had also made their phones waterproof...
Fooled by the fake advert, which included the statement "waterproofing covered by Apple's warranty policy", some users reportedly upgraded their iPhones with iOS 7 and dunked them in water to test the new feature – only to discover they had just destroyed their expensive smartphones.[/QUOTE][URL]http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/sep/26/waterproof-iphone-ad-hoax-tricked-users-into-destroying-their-handsets[/URL]

Software...upgrade...made...their...phone...waterproof.

Some people are just too ignorant to be around high tech devices. Sheesh!

Brian wrote:
[QUOTE]Did you know, by the way, that the four-letter English language S-word is frequently used in Dutch in everyday life, even to some extent in formal contexts?[/QUOTE]I recently became aware of a word which traveled in the other direction: "poppycock."

From Merriam Webster online:
[QUOTE][B][SIZE=2]Origin of [I]POPPYCOCK[/I][/SIZE][/B]

Dutch dialect [I]pappekak,[/I] literally, soft dung, from Dutch [I]pap[/I] pap + [I]kak[/I] dungFirst Known Use: 1865


[/QUOTE]Foolish me! I thought it was a reference to George H. W. Bush's copulatory organ. :wink:

But I'm not dead yet!
 

[url]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24486718[/url]

[QUOTE=xilman;355933][URL]http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-24486718[/URL][/QUOTE]

Shouldn't that be "but I'm not dead anymore"?
Sounds more optiimistic ...

At least the judge did not give 'im a blow to the 'ead, Monty Python-style.

[YOUTUBE]Sh8mNjeuyV4[/YOUTUBE]

WTF were the programmers doing, and WTF did Walmart allow an unlimited purchasing?

[url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57607332/ebt-benefit-card-glitch-sparks-walmart-shopping-sprees-in-louisiana/[/url]

[QUOTE=xilman;356205]WTF were the programmers doing, and WTF did Walmart allow an unlimited purchasing?

[URL]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-201_162-57607332/ebt-benefit-card-glitch-sparks-walmart-shopping-sprees-in-louisiana/[/URL][/QUOTE]

As to the Walmart part of your question, the answer is, quote, "Ka-CHING!"

[QUOTE=kladner;356208]As to the Walmart part of your question, the answer is, quote, "Ka-CHING!"[/QUOTE]Even if they get busted for fraud?

[QUOTE=xilman;356212]Even if they get busted for fraud?[/QUOTE]

They were more than likely very well advised by their (large) legal department in real-time...

WM Lawyer: "But Judge, if we didn't let people buy what they bought when they did, then some poor children might have gone hungry!

Judge: "Why were all these hungry people buying flat-screen TVs?

[QUOTE=xilman;356212]Even if they get busted for fraud?[/QUOTE]

[CHANNELING]Hey! They just sell stuff. It's not their fault if crooked customers are cheating the system.[/CHANNELING]

Besides, I'm sure they got Legal to sign off before word came down from On High to go on scooping up the money. I don't know if the state can put a dispute on the payments, and leave Walmart holding the bag. The story makes it plain that they KNEW what was happening.

This really looks like a situation where only the lawyers win.

EDIT: chalsall was quicker, but it's the thought that counts. The Legal Department had to sign off on that. If worse comes to worse, they can throw a couple of lower level people to the wolves.