I was curious what Mike was getting at since I haven't actually been visiting Wikileaks or paying attention to the stuff on it.
So, I Googled "wikileaks" and clicked on the 3rd link down, which took me straight to the site by its IP address (screw DNS) and went to the "mirrors" page.
Holy shit. That's a lot of mirrors. Try shutting them all down. Just try.
I didn't click through to the article, but I don't see the big deal on this one. Trademark doesn't prevent people from copying the the 16-second song. It just prevents people from using it in commerce in a confusing way.
What's more ridiculous: trademarking a longer 16-second musical composition or trademarking a shorter series of 3 notes?
Or, you know, shut down the website with a big explanation why, and explain that you'll no longer be watching the show and say why others should stay away from it as well.
Either way, the reasoning in this case is retarded.
There are legitimate reasons a journalist can be forced to give up a source. (The right to free press balanced against another individuals rights, etc.) Could the judge have used that reasoning in this case without trying to redefine journalism?
The reporter was making a comment on someone else's website. Could the judge have just said that the reporter wasn't acting as a journalist at the time?
You don't have to give everyone get-out-of-jail-free cards to still allow bloggers to claim freedom of the press.
Verizon's agreement assumes that if you go over 5GB then you must be violating the TOS of your unlimited plan. I'm curious what you mean by "Verizon is the only one to really tighten security on their airwaves. partially through proprietorial means" other than just counting bytes.
I'm not sure it was an article. It didn't really have any content, it's surrounded by more advertising than content, and the author only has one other post here that was tl;dr, but the comments made it sound equally ... empty. The TIC posts (even when there's a sponsor) are interesting. This one isn't.
From what I hear, they originally pitched it as a TV series, where the movie ended up being the first and second episodes. Essentially, they have enough material for 12 movies.
Agreed. Why not be against an unnecessary regulation? I'm usually against solving problems that don't exist and creating solutions that do nothing.
I bought a Droid at $200, retail is $550 without contract. I'm not sure if my early termination fee is the standard $175 or the higher $350 for some smartphones (their wording was very ambiguous when I got it). Either way, this 'law' wouldn't do anything about that already-ridiculous $350 termination fee since it matches the subsidy.
Interestingly enough, those who originally fought for democracy in this country spread their message by spreading free content - scattering paper pamphlets - around as far and as wide as possible with no pay wall. It sounds like free content encourages democracy, based on history.
What YouTube has done has made it popular, but it hasn't made it profitable. There's no direct money to be made in embedded videos. Maybe it can be monetized well but even YouTube isn't doing that well yet, so I don't think the comparison is fair.
Now, YouTube is beginning to compete with Hulu and YouTube may prove more profitable for all the reasons you mention - being more open, not serving too many conflicting interests, but it's still too early to say.
Criticizing Hulu's stupid policies is fair, but kudos to Hulu for at least trying something different instead of just copying YouTube, because I don't think that's the path to success either.
Comparing infringement to illegal drug trafficking is different, but comparing infringement to marijuana use is kinda relevant. Both are demonized way more than they should be, and both will continue regardless of how far underground they're pushed.
I freaking HATE url shortening services. This is another reason why they shouldn't exist. You should be able to see the destination of a link before clicking on it. Twitter could easily be structured in such a way to do so without screwing up its whole 140 character thing.
The traffic is really freaking slow. I can't imagine that working in my town full of 25, 35, and 45 mph roads. It also doesn't explain much of how it works. To me, it looks like it's just "go really slow and deliberately plow your way through", or a codified form of "asshole driving".
Also clicked on the wired article. tl;dr, with too much narrative. I would like a simple quick explanation, not a novella.
So, this is the 5th or 6th article I've read on these subjects, but I still have no idea how specifically any of these alternatives work. I also don't see, quantifiably, how they would be better than the system of triggered red lights in my area.
Now, I do agree then I've seen many, many, many streetlights go up in places where a stop sign would do fine, and many 4-way stops where a two way worked fine, etc. I also agree the red-light cameras and cell phone laws are incredibly counterproductive and are usually just revenue grabs. So, yes, fewer laws, less control, better roads. But I don't see how the revolutionary changes would help my hometown.
Thought it's not linked here, I think I have seen a video of the Dutch roundabout (no not that video, the other one) and it looks like it just turned the intersection into a bunch of right turns. Which is fine, but it would involve digging up a crapload of real estate for a given intersection.
On the post: How Political Pundits Get Confused When They Don't Understand That Wikileaks Is Distributed
Re:
So, I Googled "wikileaks" and clicked on the 3rd link down, which took me straight to the site by its IP address (screw DNS) and went to the "mirrors" page.
Holy shit. That's a lot of mirrors. Try shutting them all down. Just try.
On the post: Amazon Bows To US Censorship Pressure: Refuses To Host Wikileaks
Re: Hate to play Devil's Advocate
On the post: Google To TV Industry: 'Yes, Yes, Cord Cutting Is A Myth; Google TV Is Nothing To Fear'
I really wanna cut the cord (err, satellite signal?). There's no technical reason that all the stuff I want can't be available. It's just not yet.
On the post: Google To TV Industry: 'Yes, Yes, Cord Cutting Is A Myth; Google TV Is Nothing To Fear'
I really wanna cut the cord (err, satellite signal?). There's no technical reason that all the stuff I want can't be available. It's just not yet.
On the post: Forget Just Copyright, Now People Are Trademarking Music As Well
big deal?
What's more ridiculous: trademarking a longer 16-second musical composition or trademarking a shorter series of 3 notes?
On the post: Discovery Channel Forcing Deadliest Catch Fan Site Offline; Claims Embedding Official Videos Infringes
Re: Stones
On the post: A Day In The Life Of Legalized Extortion: How The BMI Shakedown Works
[Citation Needed]
Also, I know you're adamant that this is legal, but why doesn't it fall under illegal extortion?
On the post: Because Nokia And Apple Aren't In Enough Patent Lawsuits...
Re: Competing where?
On the post: Appeals Court Upholds Ruling That Blog Commenter Was Not A Journalist
Re: Re: Re:
There are legitimate reasons a journalist can be forced to give up a source. (The right to free press balanced against another individuals rights, etc.) Could the judge have used that reasoning in this case without trying to redefine journalism?
The reporter was making a comment on someone else's website. Could the judge have just said that the reporter wasn't acting as a journalist at the time?
You don't have to give everyone get-out-of-jail-free cards to still allow bloggers to claim freedom of the press.
On the post: If Flat-Rate Mobile Data Plans Are So Bad, Why Do Operators Keep Launching New Ones?
Re: AT&T can blame 3g open PPTPP
On the post: McDonald's Laughs Off Criticism Embedded In April Fool's Joke
Re:
On the post: Wait, I Thought Piracy Had Killed Any Chance Of Zombieland 2?
Re:
On the post: Bill Introduced To Limit Early Termination Fees
Re: the subsidy is a lie!
If the price of the plan were lower without the subsidy, then it wouldn't be a subsidy - it would be a payment on the phone.
Not saying that would be a bad idea, but that's not the way they currently work.
On the post: Bill Introduced To Limit Early Termination Fees
Re:
I bought a Droid at $200, retail is $550 without contract. I'm not sure if my early termination fee is the standard $175 or the higher $350 for some smartphones (their wording was very ambiguous when I got it). Either way, this 'law' wouldn't do anything about that already-ridiculous $350 termination fee since it matches the subsidy.
On the post: Free Content Undermines Democracy?
On the post: Hulu Telling Sites To Stop Embedding So Much
Comparison to YouTube
Now, YouTube is beginning to compete with Hulu and YouTube may prove more profitable for all the reasons you mention - being more open, not serving too many conflicting interests, but it's still too early to say.
Criticizing Hulu's stupid policies is fair, but kudos to Hulu for at least trying something different instead of just copying YouTube, because I don't think that's the path to success either.
On the post: Lily Allen: It's Ok To Sell My Counterfeit CDs, Just Don't Give My Music For Free
Re: Re:
On the post: The Pirate Bay Goes More Distributed, Shuts Down Tracker
Re: Re:
On the post: It Doesn't Matter How Many Twitter URLs Are Malware... Only If People Are Clicking
On the post: Want To Design Smarter Intersections? Use Less Control, Not More.
Bahhh...
The traffic is really freaking slow. I can't imagine that working in my town full of 25, 35, and 45 mph roads. It also doesn't explain much of how it works. To me, it looks like it's just "go really slow and deliberately plow your way through", or a codified form of "asshole driving".
Also clicked on the wired article. tl;dr, with too much narrative. I would like a simple quick explanation, not a novella.
So, this is the 5th or 6th article I've read on these subjects, but I still have no idea how specifically any of these alternatives work. I also don't see, quantifiably, how they would be better than the system of triggered red lights in my area.
Now, I do agree then I've seen many, many, many streetlights go up in places where a stop sign would do fine, and many 4-way stops where a two way worked fine, etc. I also agree the red-light cameras and cell phone laws are incredibly counterproductive and are usually just revenue grabs. So, yes, fewer laws, less control, better roads. But I don't see how the revolutionary changes would help my hometown.
Thought it's not linked here, I think I have seen a video of the Dutch roundabout (no not that video, the other one) and it looks like it just turned the intersection into a bunch of right turns. Which is fine, but it would involve digging up a crapload of real estate for a given intersection.
Next >>