Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the cableco,-cyberbully,-prosecutor,-prince dept
This week, after yet another incident of child porn laws being used against sexting teens, our winner for most insightful came from an anonymous commenter who neatly summed up this baffling attitude:
In order to prevent these teens from ruining their lives, WE'RE going to ruin their lives.
In second place we've got another anonymous commenter, this time responding to the story of a new homeowner's harrowing experience with Comcast and CenturyLink, and pointing out that there's a whole other ridiculous muni-broadband-regulation angle that we didn't focus on:
You left out the best part, where there is a municipal fiber line running right near his neighborhood, but the law prevents him from accessing it.
This story makes me rage so much. The competition is non-existent. If we had anything resembling an actual market, we wouldn't even need Title II.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we'll start with one more anonymous comment from that same story. This time, it's a call to (congressional) action:
Members of Congress:
REIGN. IN. THESE. COMPANIES!
Seriously, this is getting absurd. What do the American people have to do or say to you to finally get you to actually listen to us instead of the paid mouthpieces from the broadband industry who want do what they want with no one to keep them in check?
No more mergers. No more protectionist laws to prop up their monopoly or duopoly gatekeeper power. Stop fighting against net neutrality and enact policies that dramatically increase competition.
Signed,
The Fed Up American People.
Next, we head to our post about the recent attempts to paint public backlashes against corporations as "cyberbullying", which prompted ChurchHatesTucker to affirm his beliefs:
Now I'm even more convinced that cyberbullying laws are a terrible idea.
For first place on the funny side, we start out with the ongoing investigation into the investigation into Silk Road, where the facts continue to be astonishing, and where Michael decided to apply law enforcement's own standards:
"Force communicated directly with Ulbricht using PGP encrypted emails"
Full stop. This guy is a terrorist.
In second place, we've got the capper to a thread sparked when someone (who apparently doesn't know how to Google things) aimlessly attacked the credibility of one of our guest posters. Another anonymous commenter supplied them, and a third chimed in with this jeering rejoinder:
Wait a sec - you are citing data ..... and facts!
Are you sure that is allowed?
You see some folk think innuendo and vague references are quite sufficient and get all uppity when someone calls bullshit.
For editor's choice on the funny side, we head to the ongoing story of Attorney General Jim Hood's attacks on Google. One aspect of the ongoing case was the "Younger Abstention", which would keep the courts out of the issue, and which the judge rejected thusly:
Moreover, even if the Younger elements were satisfied here, the court would not be required to abstain here because an exception to the application of the doctrine applies. Indeed, federal courts may disregard the Younger doctrine when a state court proceeding was brought in bad faith or with the purpose of harassing the federal plaintiff...
Mason Wheeler decided to put this in layman's terms:
Translation:
Hood: Younger! Younger!
The law: I may be younger but I wasn't born yesterday
Finally, we enter the always-insane world of Prince, who is currently facing an IP lawsuit because the universe loves irony. Prince has gone copyright-crazy over everything imaginable, and for some like jupterkansas, that's getting to be his dominant legacy:
The only time Prince is even on my radar is when he's mentioned here on TechDirt, and even then I feel I must be infringing something.
That's all for this week, folks!
Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.
Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.
While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.
–The Techdirt Team
Reader Comments
Subscribe: RSS
View by: Time | Thread
No, funniest of week is:
It's funny because Masnick allows senseless vulgarity but CENSORS reasoned opposition.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No, funniest of week is:
All I'm saying is I'm a little confused as to where and what Mike is censoring.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: No, funniest of week is:
The funniest part of course, beyond that they seem to think that they're so important that anyone even cares who they are to that extent, is that a lot of them are on the side of being perfectly fine with actual censorship, that of blocking or siezing sites based upon accusation alone.
Accused of copyright infringement? Then you deserve to lose your site or have it blocked, all without being able to defend yourself beforehand. Act like a child by throwing out insults and name-calling? Well in that case it's censorship, pure and simple, to have your comment reported by other people and hidden by a single mouse-click. The hypocrisy and double-standards are downright hilarious really.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No, funniest of week is:
This is just as reasoned as many of the comments that get flagged on this site.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: By definition, you don't see the censored posts!
Anyway, is CLEARLY (to me after repeated trials) outright censorship blocking posts entirely.
I must use Tor because can't post from any local IP address: appears that Masnick bans BOTH of TWO lower sub-ranges -- effectively 130,000 addresses. -- Yes, really. His loss of other comments from the area is only about 0.00001 a year, so it's a good trade.
As example, I'm the one who pointed out last week in:
https://www.techdirt.com/articles/20150402/1050402/10500630527/lawsuit-finally-explores-what-coun ts-as-user-under-dmca.shtml
that the clear language of the statute says sites can't just ignore obvious piracy -- Masnick counters with current case law, fine, but decisions do change, as the instance case proves. As does the Aereo case, which Masnick was
certain about but proved wrong.
By the way, Masnick, no less than THREE of AC's are me. Tor works often enough.
As for the boilerplate fanboy attack that it's me who's been abusive, surely that's to be judged post by post? -- And if that commenter has a specific in mind, then he knows that Masnick IS censoring. Sheer double-think lying.
In fact, I was attacked and banned for my VIEWS and effectiveness, not how said. My contemporary complaints were ignored. No fanboy has EVER even been admonished here.
And now I'm banned in advance of any specific cause.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No, funniest of week is:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: No, funniest of week is:
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re:
As for "attacked and banned", you willingly left the site, then crowed about your "return" to spamming the site after a year of leaving (which, one might add, took place after countless threats to do so which never materialized into anything). If your "contemporary complaints" are being ignored, consider that your prior behavior over the years basically shit-stained your moniker and patterns. Seriously, giving up the out_of_the_blue synonym hasn't helped - you're still posting useless shit in the Subject lines. If you're that desperate to start anew consider trying to make yourself a little less petulant and annoying.
I think it's funny how you "disappeared", then Whatever started spamming his shit on the site, and then he threw a hissy fit and you reappeared to take over his poop flinging exercises.
And remember: using TOR to mask your IP address makes you a pirate. That's what all the great anti-pirates say, who you worship. Congratulations, you're a pirate.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: By definition, you don't see the censored posts!
a) you're a troll
b) you literally just admitted to sockpuppetry right now. Not cool, man.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: No, funniest of week is:
The comment you point to has been flagged by the community and is hidden.
Isn't that what the report button is for? Your argument makes very little sense.
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: No, funniest of week is:
Your paradox-absorbing crumple zones are simply amazing!
[ link to this | view in thread ]
Re: Re: Re: No, funniest of week is:
[ link to this | view in thread ]