Unfair used in a sentence

Unfair in a sentence as an adjective

You think that is an unfair thing for me to say? Well I've got worse for you.

Going after them is just unfair." [Note: Search engines.

I'm glad the author has found a place for him but going on such an uninformed rant is unfair.

This article admits that he ignored all of the warnings he was given, and now accuses Google of unfair business practice. I don't buy it.

Steve Jobs, whoever, it might seem unfair that just because someone died that the "unworthy" things they did get celebrated. I disagree.

Maybe they would be, but they never even knew they were being recorded, so it seemed kind of unfair to make that call for them. We eventually decided to not allow the data to be shared.

The attacks on Buffett are utterly unfair and unjustified. We should all have an open mind and try to understand the proposal.

That's unfair to regular expressions, though, because I actually have seen them solve a problem before. Cops improving a situation?

It seems unfair somehow that our whole industry benefits from Newegg individually taking on the risk and expense of bringing a patent to litigation and appeal. Maybe more patents would be challenged if there were more cooperative efforts to bust bad patents.

But it amounts to an inherently unfair attack that is almost impossible to defend just by the nature of the case. In law, we learn early on that a one-sided story can almost always be made to sound compelling, while on a full airing it can just as easily be shown as just the opposite.

I'm going to make this clear - there is absolutely, positively nothing wrong with this - not at all - it is merely reality and not particularly unfair. People stating pointless platitudes that success is due to things like "Be 10x more productive", "Commitment" and "People, product, and philosophy" are simply wasting their breath, other people's time and confusing what actually happens.

I used to think this predatory characterization was sensationalist and unfair, but by now, from what I read about amazon so far in the press and even in their own press statements, I think there might be something to it. But then again, I'm also just one of these Euro-socialists who thinks that everybody should have health insurance and should earn a living wage if working full time.

We try to rationalize the state of affairs by pointing out all the ways that Wall Street has an "unfair advantage" but the fact of the matter is that: what do you expect in a free market system that rewards every marginal advantage other than wealth to flow from less sophisticated people to more sophisticated ones? We like the idea of letting everyone transact freely, but we are uncomfortable with the "winner take all" implication of that policy.

The idea here is that if you are supplying both the operating system and the applications that your applications should not benefit from being made by the same company as the OS, in other words, that it should be a level playing ground without you having an unfair advantage.

I personally think a lot of criticisms leveled against Java's verbosity and inflexibility are unfair, by virtue of the following: Many incredibly successful and complex open source projects are written in Java. While you could say this stems from Java's enormous popularity, one interesting property of huge Java open-source projects is that I can usually crack open the code and quickly get a sense of how I could contribute to the system without breaking it.

People who have different upbringings in different geographic areas are of course going to be biased towards certain views, and it's a bit unfair to chastise them for not completely realigning their viewpoints overnight for something that has probably been the fastest and most productive civil rights movement, maybe ever. People love to talk about tolerance except when tolerance means they have to deal with people who were raised with fundamentally different views, or people who may even have the same views they did a decade ago but failed to "evolve."

> Because while he was playing his little game, to "prove" that police profile people and to "prove" that getting arrested and jailed can be a violent and unfair experience, someone else was getting away with a purse snatching, or beating up an ex-girlfriend, or playing the knock-out game, or emptying a cash register. You're missing the point that police profiling is already focusing attention on people not committing those crimes, or that plenty of people are getting away with the same behaviour but not facing any consequences for their actions.

How you're going to survive the interregnum of unfair VC funded competition is a really hard question for which I have no other advice than to cut every bit of spending and go into 'cockroach' or 'spore' mode, hang on to your core team at any price. VCs should be far far more critical about the companies that they invest in, that the path to break even is clear and that they are not going to invest in a company whose business model is broken but where the cracks are paved over with marketing and growth by burning investors money.

Quote Examples using Unfair

One competitor can indeed sue another competitor for private damages and other relief if the other competitor is gaining an unfair competitive advantage by falsely advertising that its products or services do something that is material to the customer's decision to use that product or service. Here, the result would turn on the ability to show that the parties sued are in fact engaged in false or deceptive advertising. Even here, however, the case is likely sketchy, in my view, from a quick review of the allegations made. All in all, this is a most unusual case filed by an unrepresented party that cannot legally represent itself in the forum chosen and resting on legal theories that are a real stretch in most cases. I believe Mr. Greenspan is both sincere and passionate about what he believes but what he asserts is really a case to be made to the legislative policy-makers, not to the courts. There may indeed be incredible unfairness in the way in which these laws are framed and applied.

Anonymous

> It is also unfair to take him to task for quoting from a publicly available source Quotes which were already removed from their full context, taken further out of context by Arrington, with a shallow, incomplete understanding of the long-term consequences of the events being recounted. Arrington has a Bachelor's in economics and a law degree, until 1999 he was a securities lawyer. He was still in law school when jwz was actually doing useful things and wrote those diary entries. Arrington has never been an engineer of any kind. He has no concept of the kind of stress placed on engineers, little grasp of the work environments he wants people to put up with, and as a VC, has a massive conflict of interest. Invoking a respected name through excerpts of a document that offered only a narrow, fuzzy window into what jwz went through in order to lure young hackers to an inevitable burnout for a likely reward of zilch is just scummy, and it is in no way unfair to call Arrington on his BS.

Anonymous