Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the hearsay dept
This week, our top comment on the insightful side is, it seems, the fulfillment of a long-running hope — Miles won first place with thoughts about the Techdirt community:
Every time this subject comes up I think that the community here at Techdirt is remarkably civil. There is some trolling and some heated discussions, but all in all, not too bad.
I think part of the reason is the tools you've given us. We can hide (but not remove) the posts we find offensive, and vote for the ones we particularly like. I always look forward to Sunday afternoon to see who won (I've never made the cut, sigh.)
No sighing this week!
In second place, we've got Arthur Moore with a simple explanation of why trademark disputes between private companies do indeed have First Amendment implications:
Remember that IP laws themselves are a "temporary" monopoly granted by the government. They are, fundamentally, a government authorized restriction of speech.
We don't normally consider IP laws as an exception to the First Amendment, but there's no other way to look at it. Which means any sort of overly broad claim runs smack dab into the issue of free speech.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start out with a comment from That One Guy about the FCC's denial that there is a broadband competition problem:
As the saying (roughly) goes...
'It is difficult to get an FCC commissioner to understand something, when his future employment/'retirement' opportunities depend on him (claiming not to) understand it.'
Next, we've got an anonymous comment outlining why big tech's "monopoly" problem aint got nothin' on telecom:
Just this morning, I looked up an item at Amazon, and yet, placed an order through a competitor because it was cheaper.
Don't want an iPhone.... Samsung actually makes some pretty good gear too.
Don't want to use Google for search or email or anything? Use DuckDuckGo and Mail.com and install an ad blocker and whitelist everything but big G.
Need to sign up for an ISP not called Comcast? To F** Bad! They are, despite me living in large city, my ONLY option. And somehow THEY'RE the ones not violating any antitrust rules.
Over on the funny side, our first place winner is That One Guy with a summary of the CJEU's worrying and messy statements about content monitoring and filtering:
An advocate general with cognitive dissonance, lovely
'General monitoring requirements are bad and prohibited.' -CJEU Advocate General
'If however a court were to require a platform to keep specific content from being re-posted, either by the original poster or other users, something that could only be done via general monitoring/filters, that's okay.' - Also CJEU Advocate General
In second place, we've got an anonymous solution to Activision's trademark dispute:
Well, they could just patch the dialogue to say "Get in the High Mobility Multipurpose Wheeled Vehicle!! *shots fired* JOHNNY NOOOO!!!! He didn't know what to do because it took me too long to say it! CURSE YOU TRADEMARK LAWYERS! *cries*"
For editor's choice on the funny side, we start out with a brief anonymous skit all about antitrust:
Judge: Why did you break the law?
Defendant: Well, your Honor, I was hoping for an AT&T deal. You know, where you separate me from the rest of my family for little while, then make me above the law in the future and I come out rich and reunite with my family. Is that too much to ask?
Judge: Depends on who you are.
And finally, we've got an anonymous commenter who found a use for Trump's anti-AT&T tweet:
I was going to use this as my (cord cutting) excuse when I call to cancel DirecTV next month. "Well, the president said I should..."
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
Percentages and work ethic
Iv always wondered why we have such a problem with courts and cops not being able to do their jobs..
At some point there had to be balance and things could get done, but Then the Court gets besieged, and over crowed, and Slows down.
Its the idea that you need ?? police to help and monitor things, and even if you understand how this works, that its a constant on taxes...MORE people means more people PAY, and you get more police.. The same as WE SHOULD for the Judges, and other facilities.. but Why do they do up in COST and cost more and more?
Oregon had a law be voted on based on the idea that the State employees were getting to many benefits and should pay MORE for what they were getting.. but 90% of those employed by the state were barely over Min wage.. so it didnt pass.
Who here would like to goto a Metro DMV??(NOT) you would think for all the people that need access, that they would have enough people there..
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
We have only your word, never see any numbers.
Well, well. I see that TOP "Insight" serves Techdirt's interests AND further congratulates itself in a self-congratulatory piece.
Readers of course don't know who wrote that comment.
This is obvious, except that Techdirt puts on a good front.
But in fact readers have zero proof. Take away the assumption that Techdirt is an honest narrator, and what's left?
1) Techdirt doesn't show ongoing numbers of clicks for each comment, nor on the alleged "Report" used for "hiding" by "the community". There's no series of numbers that'd have to be consistent. Techdirt is free to just make them up out of the blue.
2) Apparently no one has access to numbers but Masnick. He's stated doesn't want writers getting a big head by even knowing how many read their pieces. Showing numbers would indirectly reveal much. Masnick hoards information to his own ends, as all spooks do.
3) Techdirt has slanted view, an agenda to push, and dissenters to run off. Weaponizing the Funny and Insightful is obvious way.
4) Techdirt states a "right" to make editorial changes, so has no moral dilemma over selecting comments that help promote its agenda.
5) With so few comments, fanboys have good chance to "win" and inflate their ego, which is the original purpose of the "Sunday Funnies", and more required now to hang on to last few. Techdirt is the most egregious and blatant Mutual Admiration Society I know of.
6) Techdirt is manifestly, in my view, astro-turfing with zombies having gaps of years in account activity. -- By the way, "Matthew Cline" and others, NOTE that I've not remarked on but a couple in the five weeks since you raised the topic to high visibility. Also, number of total comments dropped off. All consistent with and supporting my views.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: We have only your word, never see any numbers.
You are the sock puppet zombie seagull, who is also consistently full of shit. I don't believe you have any real dissent whatsoever, merely an agenda.
Techdirt has slanted view...
This is known as an opinion. You are slanted / have an opinion also. How the fuck do you pretend to not see how this works?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Don't feed the troll, just flag and ignore.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
But I want to feed it but have not as yet figured out what would eat it in the first place.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: Re: We have only your word, never see any numbers.
"How the fuck do you pretend to not see how this works?"
THAT sounds like political science undergrad stuff!
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
This is sad even for you, Blue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
Your tears are delicious, blue.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
I will wipe my ass with my last comcast extortion payment before sending it off. A 25% rise in billing in four months is ludicrous.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
'$25 deluxe toilet paper replacement fee...'
I wouldn't, they'll probably try to charge you for that too.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
It's fairly unlikely that the person who opens the envelope will be the same person who made the decision to raise your rates.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re:
You had plenty of warning with that comcast.. sounds like you volunteered for extortion.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
The art of trolling.
I first misread the insightful winner as
and needed a double take. The problem is that with a good introductory phrase sounding like coming from a person of reasonable intelligence, you can tack on basically anything and it sounds like a serious proposition. Let me give you an example:
See how you can tack on whatever and it sounds like a serious proposition worthy of a politician?
[ link to this | view in chronology ]
Re: The art of trolling.
Of thosr three words I seriously doubt serious belongs with the other two.
[ link to this | view in chronology ]