The proposal is to ban a tool used by one person who was dangerous and stupid -- it doesn't implicate that person's rights at all. That person can still act dangerous and stupid and take their picture, they just can't use the tool anymore to publish it.
So why wouldn't we go from there to banning Twitter entirely because stupid people use it to publish stupid posts? That wouldn't affect stupid people's First Amendment rights either -- certainly not Mr. Trump's, since he has a whole government to publish his stupidity.
Idiot's quote of the day: We're not banning Free Speech, just the tools that publish free speech, and that's perfectly fine.
I am just not seeing the independence here -- or the value.
Imagine that this was AT&T, and they picked four members of the FCC, and then those members picked the other members. We don't have to guess how that turns out, that's what we have now. We call it regulatory capture: theoretically independent -- the FCC members certainly claim independence -- in practice, slavish lap dogs.
Expect this board to uphold FB decisions 99.75% of the time, of the 0.000005% of FB decisions it actually reviews.
I am wondering where these "100 cameras" are located. Timbuktu, maybe? According to them, the cameras recorded 21,000 cars per day. But that boils down to 210 cars per camera. One station on Colonial Blvd in Orange County Florida tracked 65,000 cars/day (well, it's a busy street).
Okay, Sheffield is smaller than Orlando, but still...these roads must be pretty darn remote. Either that or someone has fudged a number somewhere.
PTO approves this crap because it's what the job requires.
Let's say someone files for "A device for conversion of a solid fuel to light by self-heated melting of the fuel and conduction of the melted fuel to a point of vaporization by capillary action." (Clue: It's a candle.)
The examiner, dumber (yes, dumber) than most, suffers a momentary fit of laughter and rejects the filing. What will ensue is called a challenge, and the examiner will spend hundreds of hours filling out paperwork, answering questions, and running to court...with the end result that the filing will get approved anyway, in all likelihood.
Is the examiner to paid do this? The real answer is, "No." The examiner is paid to review filings; his productivity is measured by the number of filings he reviews.
And while he's involved in the challenge, he's not reviewing filings. So his productivity sucks and -- assuming he doesn't get fired for bad productivity -- he will miss pay increments, which means he gets poorer.
Poorer...does he get wiser? If he does, he becomes one of the smarter examiners: when he gets a crap filing he shakes his head and soldiers -- approved.
The charges say that 41 kilograms were submitted as evidence, but Louvado, Gladstone and “V.R.” later found three more kilograms from the Murphy seizure that were left behind. It is not clear whether it was an oversight or intentional.
I'm sure it was unintentional, because drug dealers always put 41 kilos in the back and seperately hide another 3 kilos inside the spare tire, where no cop with a search warrant would ever think to look.
Re: Time to break out the cloning machine again...
What will the department do now? Most likely, give the officers some training in how to do parallel construction right.
Also known as, "The first part of the search was recorded on an SD card that accidentally got stepped on, set afire, and dropped in the sink grinder. Oops."
Does Mexico have a Foreign Claims Act equivalent? If not, maybe they need one. I'm sure they could find something that belongs to CBP on the Mexico side of the Border that could be confiscated to satisfy a claim.
You can only track your kids or your workers on a perfect phone. But [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] if you were to fib [wink, wink, nudge, nudge], it's not like we would check..and if you run it on any phone that happens to run our software even if it's [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] less than perfect, well [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] who's to know? [wink, wink, nudge, nudge]
On the post: Cars, Guns, Cider, And Snapchat Don't Cause Crime
Re: Re: This will solve every problem we have
The proposal is to ban a tool used by one person who was dangerous and stupid -- it doesn't implicate that person's rights at all. That person can still act dangerous and stupid and take their picture, they just can't use the tool anymore to publish it.
So why wouldn't we go from there to banning Twitter entirely because stupid people use it to publish stupid posts? That wouldn't affect stupid people's First Amendment rights either -- certainly not Mr. Trump's, since he has a whole government to publish his stupidity.
Idiot's quote of the day: We're not banning Free Speech, just the tools that publish free speech, and that's perfectly fine.
Like hell it is.
On the post: Cars, Guns, Cider, And Snapchat Don't Cause Crime
This will solve every problem we have
Nice to know that, pretty soon, we can sue Twitter for encouraging Trump by creating a tool to enable his fact free tweets.
On the post: Hacks Are Always Worse Than Reported: Nintendo's Breached Accounts Magically Double
Damage control
There's already a name for what these companies are doing: damage control.
On the post: Carnegie Mellon Researchers Design 'Nutrition Label' For The Internet Of Broken Things
Brick By
They also need a "Brick By" date, the date after which the company may brick the device. It may well be earlier than the security updates date.
On the post: FCC Delays Law Banning Your ISP From Charging You 'Rental Fees' For Hardware You Already Own
Re: I know this is unrelated, but...
Aren't those the same symptoms you get dealing with a cable company?
On the post: As Some Are Requiring People To Give Up Their Info To Dine, Stories Of Creeps Abusing That Info Come Out
Yeah, in the meantime, the barn doors are flapping in the wind and the horses are long gone.
Who made it a rule that (security / privacy) must be afterthoughts?
On the post: Facebook's Supreme Court Is In Place... And Everyone Hates It, Because Facebook Makes Everyone Hate Everything
Regulatory capture
I am just not seeing the independence here -- or the value.
Imagine that this was AT&T, and they picked four members of the FCC, and then those members picked the other members. We don't have to guess how that turns out, that's what we have now. We call it regulatory capture: theoretically independent -- the FCC members certainly claim independence -- in practice, slavish lap dogs.
Expect this board to uphold FB decisions 99.75% of the time, of the 0.000005% of FB decisions it actually reviews.
...and not even binding?
As useful as screen doors on a submarine.
On the post: UK City Leaves Nearly Nine Million License Plate/Location Data Records Exposed On The Open Web
Something don't seem right
I am wondering where these "100 cameras" are located. Timbuktu, maybe? According to them, the cameras recorded 21,000 cars per day. But that boils down to 210 cars per camera. One station on Colonial Blvd in Orange County Florida tracked 65,000 cars/day (well, it's a busy street).
Okay, Sheffield is smaller than Orlando, but still...these roads must be pretty darn remote. Either that or someone has fudged a number somewhere.
On the post: The System Works: Deputy Who Randomly Fired His Gun Through His Windshield Into Rush Hour Traffic Fined $2
$2
Well at least they made him pay for the bullet.
On the post: FTC Just Sent Over $1 Million To People Scammed By 'Patent Marketing' Company The Former AG Matt Whitaker Was Involved With
What happened to the S?
I notice thar millions flowed in, but million is being refunded. Funny how plural becomes singular. I guess crime does pay.
On the post: Those Ex-Theranos Patents Look Really Bad; Contest Opened To Find Prior Art To Get Them Invalidated
Why PTO approves this crap
PTO approves this crap because it's what the job requires.
Let's say someone files for "A device for conversion of a solid fuel to light by self-heated melting of the fuel and conduction of the melted fuel to a point of vaporization by capillary action." (Clue: It's a candle.)
The examiner, dumber (yes, dumber) than most, suffers a momentary fit of laughter and rejects the filing. What will ensue is called a challenge, and the examiner will spend hundreds of hours filling out paperwork, answering questions, and running to court...with the end result that the filing will get approved anyway, in all likelihood.
Is the examiner to paid do this? The real answer is, "No." The examiner is paid to review filings; his productivity is measured by the number of filings he reviews.
And while he's involved in the challenge, he's not reviewing filings. So his productivity sucks and -- assuming he doesn't get fired for bad productivity -- he will miss pay increments, which means he gets poorer.
Poorer...does he get wiser? If he does, he becomes one of the smarter examiners: when he gets a crap filing he shakes his head and soldiers -- approved.
On the post: Can ProctorU Be Trusted With Students' Personal Data?
I am surprised there wasn't a kitchen sink in there.
On the post: Another Baltimore Cop Facing Criminal Charges, This Time For Stealing 3 Kilos Of Coke From A Drug Bust
From the Felton article:
I'm sure it was unintentional, because drug dealers always put 41 kilos in the back and seperately hide another 3 kilos inside the spare tire, where no cop with a search warrant would ever think to look.
On the post: Federal Court Blasts Lying Cop Using His Warrantless Search Of A Room To Fraudulently Obtain A Search Warrant
Re: Time to break out the cloning machine again...
What will the department do now? Most likely, give the officers some training in how to do parallel construction right.
Also known as, "The first part of the search was recorded on an SD card that accidentally got stepped on, set afire, and dropped in the sink grinder. Oops."
On the post: Surprise: Judge Throws Out Jury's Awful Copyright Infringement Decision Over Katy Perry Song
Re:
"All the money" is "deserved" by important people, don't you know?
On the post: Why Does The NY Times Seem Literally Incapable Of Reporting Accurately On Section 230?
Give them a break
Give the NYT a break. They're terribly busy grinding their axe.
On the post: FCC To Dole Out Some Dainty Wrist Slaps For Wireless Carrier Location Data Scandals
Re:
...and they'll call it a "Privacy Recovery Fee."
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Re: Mexican FCA?
Recycling a fence comes to mind.
On the post: Supreme Court Says It's OK For Border Patrol Agents To Kill Mexican Citizens As Long As They Die In Mexico
Mexican FCA?
Does Mexico have a Foreign Claims Act equivalent? If not, maybe they need one. I'm sure they could find something that belongs to CBP on the Mexico side of the Border that could be confiscated to satisfy a claim.
On the post: Stalkerware Developer Demands TechCrunch Remove Article Detailing Its Leaking Of Sensitive Data
Wink, wink, nudge, nudge
You can only track your kids or your workers on a perfect phone. But [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] if you were to fib [wink, wink, nudge, nudge], it's not like we would check..and if you run it on any phone that happens to run our software even if it's [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] less than perfect, well [wink, wink, nudge, nudge] who's to know? [wink, wink, nudge, nudge]
Next >>