USA tricks USSR into attacking country, funds terrorists to fight Communism, terrorists take over and turn a country that was evolving and implementing very progressive and ~freedom inducing~ policies into dangerous theocracy.
USA invades country to get rid of terrorists and spends 20 years and shitloads of money in a useless war.
USA decides it's too expensive and not worth and leaves country letting terrorists regain control AND leaving allies to die.
That. Netflix ramped up prices here and the scattering of content among several streaming services is pushing ppl from my social circle back to piracy. Win?
Re: in a world where content can only be rented, it will be stol
First, there's no thievery involved, merely unauthorized copying. Unless you consider what the companies are doing with their customers when you buy some gadget and they simply kill it when they don't feel like playing anymore.
I'm not sure if this is good or bad overall but I am sure social media platforms are monolithic, inaccessible messes when it comes to giving people the chance to challenge a block/suspension/ban. I had my account suspended on Twitter these days because I used a homophobic slur satirizing those who use it seriously. It was clearly automated and I had 2 options: delete the tweet and wait 12h to have my account restored (i couldn't interact, just read other tweets for the duration) or challenge the ban and remain fully blocked for several days before someone hopefully reviewed my case so at the very least i won't have3 a strike registered to my account. The proccess was convoluted so I decided the least painful way was to delete the tweet and get 12h restrictions.
Now, I do understand the scale of Twitter, Facebook is massive and I wouldn't expect any review to be fast. However there are a few things that should be considered before restricting an account automatically or due to ppl flagging the accounts. I do think accounts with a clean history should be given more leeway and kept unblocked while somebody evaluates the user challenge for instance. Older accounts, accounts with a lot of activity, followers, interactions (I know, bots but if bot sentinel can identify bots on Twitter then the companies themselves can as well). Accounts with previous stances of mass flagging (ie: left people attacked by right masses or vice-versa). I can go on.
My point is, there has to be ways to give some protection to the user, even if via algorithms as well.
Ah the utterly broken copyright system showing its face. I've been reading TD for a decade now and oh boy this shit never change. And never will, crony capitalism is there to ensure it won't.
Re: At best, your reading comprehension is abysmal.
Even I who were a prolific poster here (because the community is awesome) had to reduce my participation because of more pressing matters (ie: i have to deal with our very own genocide and I'm actively working against this bs from way back in 2018) but you are firmly spewing your bullshit a decade into my experience within techdirt. Seriously, what a pitiful life you must live.
I agree with you and as the author said "The citation is dead; long live the citation."
I believe this kind of approach could be adapted to all other areas as well easing the burden of peer reviews and helping identify plagiarism. At the very least flag weird articles for further scrutiny. At the very least it's worth a try. Scientific production is not only about proving a hypothesis or something right. It's also about either proving the opposite and actually coming out with nothing (ie: your method wasn't appropriate can be a conclusion).
At the very least those responsible for this absurdity should spend at least the same amount of time in jail as their victims, no? Remembering he was on the death row. Capital punishment must not be an option. Because humans.
It's kind of amusing to see people like our bright mind friend above. I say kind of because the result of that mindset is the shithole we are in today.
I use marijuana regularly. Sometimes to deal with pain or inflammation and sometimes purely to get stoned and have a good time. I have plenty of friends who use as well. All of them have at least an academic degree and some other title (master, doctorate etc). I myself have multiple degrees related to engineering (chemistry, hydraulics..) and specialized in industrial administration. Since it's illegal here we have a guy who grows the thing and we help him with costs not to feed drug dealers. I know this is my personal view but we all know that this scenario is far far more common than law enforcement would like to admit. And when it's white rich people they simply won't enforce the law even with much more problematic drugs.
Not to mention the obvious medicinal uses, the textile awesomeness of the fiber and other benefits.
The thing is, I'm not saying everyone should use and there are addiction issues but... What harm is there? How marijuana use is worse than artificially maintaining drug trafficking chains with all the associated violence? How is it worse than police brutality against whatever quantity a person is carrying? How the fuck is it worse than ALCOHOL?
It takes small amounts of critical thinking to realize that at the very least the current way of dealing with drugs perhaps isn't the smartest one.
Ultimately the target should be the awful individuals congregating over Gab instance and the ones running the infrastructure behind it. When somebody uses a gun to commit crimes we go after the gun manufacturer or the reseller? Unless they violate some law to sell the weapon to the hipothetical criminal they shouldn't be targeted. Same with mastodon. They cannot be responsible for how people use tools that are completely open source and easily replicated but the host for Gab's instance can be targeted if they knowingly host such speech.
On the post: Court Slaps Down Ajit Pai's Lazy FCC Ruling On 5G Safety, Likely Fueling Conspiracy Theorists
The USA will have to deal with Trump's monumentally shitty legacy for decades. Often in unforeseen ways. Talking from experience.
On the post: Sensitive Data On Afghan Allies Collected By The US Military Is Now In The Hands Of The Taliban
USA tricks USSR into attacking country, funds terrorists to fight Communism, terrorists take over and turn a country that was evolving and implementing very progressive and ~freedom inducing~ policies into dangerous theocracy.
USA invades country to get rid of terrorists and spends 20 years and shitloads of money in a useless war.
USA decides it's too expensive and not worth and leaves country letting terrorists regain control AND leaving allies to die.
Profit?
On the post: Netflix's Ramped Up War On VPNs Comes With Collateral Damage
Re: Doesn't blocking service encourage piracy?
That. Netflix ramped up prices here and the scattering of content among several streaming services is pushing ppl from my social circle back to piracy. Win?
On the post: Illinois Governor Signs Law Banning Cops From Performing Background Searches On Public Speakers
Re: blue lies mafia don't care about your rights
Apt comparison on your title. Law enforcement in most places are behaving like mafias.
On the post: Court Orders Injunction Against RomUniverse To Permanently Shut Down, Destroy Nintendo ROMs
And Nintendo ultimately failed. There are tons of torrents circulating with said roms and these torrents cannot be taken down.
On the post: California Regulators Say T-Mobile Lied To Gain Sprint Merger Approval
Telcos lying to get govt to approve all sorts of consumer screwing shenanigans? I'm so surprised and shocked.
Do we need a sarcasm warning?
On the post: The End Of Ownership: How Big Companies Are Trying To Turn Everyone Into Renters
Re: in a world where content can only be rented, it will be stol
First, there's no thievery involved, merely unauthorized copying. Unless you consider what the companies are doing with their customers when you buy some gadget and they simply kill it when they don't feel like playing anymore.
Second, long live the pirates.
On the post: Top German Court Says Facebook Must Inform Users About Deleting Their Posts Or Suspending Their Account, Explain Why, And Allow Them To Respond
I'm not sure if this is good or bad overall but I am sure social media platforms are monolithic, inaccessible messes when it comes to giving people the chance to challenge a block/suspension/ban. I had my account suspended on Twitter these days because I used a homophobic slur satirizing those who use it seriously. It was clearly automated and I had 2 options: delete the tweet and wait 12h to have my account restored (i couldn't interact, just read other tweets for the duration) or challenge the ban and remain fully blocked for several days before someone hopefully reviewed my case so at the very least i won't have3 a strike registered to my account. The proccess was convoluted so I decided the least painful way was to delete the tweet and get 12h restrictions.
Now, I do understand the scale of Twitter, Facebook is massive and I wouldn't expect any review to be fast. However there are a few things that should be considered before restricting an account automatically or due to ppl flagging the accounts. I do think accounts with a clean history should be given more leeway and kept unblocked while somebody evaluates the user challenge for instance. Older accounts, accounts with a lot of activity, followers, interactions (I know, bots but if bot sentinel can identify bots on Twitter then the companies themselves can as well). Accounts with previous stances of mass flagging (ie: left people attacked by right masses or vice-versa). I can go on.
My point is, there has to be ways to give some protection to the user, even if via algorithms as well.
On the post: As Western Democracies Ramp Up Efforts To Censor Social Media, Russia Appears To Feel Emboldened To Do More Itself
Western democracies you say. I say it's an oxymoron.
On the post: Twitch Manages To Get Out Some 'Disappointment' With Music Industry Over Latest Round Of DMCA Claims
Ah the utterly broken copyright system showing its face. I've been reading TD for a decade now and oh boy this shit never change. And never will, crony capitalism is there to ensure it won't.
On the post: Former FCC Boss Ajit Pai Gets Handsomely Rewarded For Years Of Broadband Policy Falsehoods
Revolving door spinning smoothly.
On the post: Yet More Studies Show That 5G Isn't Hurting You
Re: So how do you explain the Havanna embassy incidents?
Dude, that's before 5G. Seriously, how do you conspiracy freaks sleep at night?
On the post: Modder Solves 'GTA Online' Loading Time Problem, Gets Paid By Rockstar For It
I'm amused that something that was done and incentivized by the company and thus totally legal got attacked. The trolls need to take their medicine.
On the post: Life Imitates Art: Warren Spector Says He Wouldn't Make 'Deus Ex' In Today's Toxic Climate
Re: At best, your reading comprehension is abysmal.
Even I who were a prolific poster here (because the community is awesome) had to reduce my participation because of more pressing matters (ie: i have to deal with our very own genocide and I'm actively working against this bs from way back in 2018) but you are firmly spewing your bullshit a decade into my experience within techdirt. Seriously, what a pitiful life you must live.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re:
Patient 31.
On the post: It's The End Of Citation As We Know It & I Feel Fine
Re:
I agree with you and as the author said "The citation is dead; long live the citation."
I believe this kind of approach could be adapted to all other areas as well easing the burden of peer reviews and helping identify plagiarism. At the very least flag weird articles for further scrutiny. At the very least it's worth a try. Scientific production is not only about proving a hypothesis or something right. It's also about either proving the opposite and actually coming out with nothing (ie: your method wasn't appropriate can be a conclusion).
Could be interesting.
On the post: Death Row Inmate Freed After Bullshit Bite Mark Evidence Determined To Be Bullshit
At the very least those responsible for this absurdity should spend at least the same amount of time in jail as their victims, no? Remembering he was on the death row. Capital punishment must not be an option. Because humans.
On the post: Iowa Prosecutors Move Ahead With Prosecuting A Journalist For Being Present At A Protest
How different is this from how authoritarian regimes deal with protests and journalists?
Just a thought.
On the post: John Oliver On Drug Raids: Why Are We Raiding Houses For Drug Quantities That Could Be Easily Flushed Down A Toilet?
Re: Re: WHY? Because drugs destroy lives.
It's kind of amusing to see people like our bright mind friend above. I say kind of because the result of that mindset is the shithole we are in today.
I use marijuana regularly. Sometimes to deal with pain or inflammation and sometimes purely to get stoned and have a good time. I have plenty of friends who use as well. All of them have at least an academic degree and some other title (master, doctorate etc). I myself have multiple degrees related to engineering (chemistry, hydraulics..) and specialized in industrial administration. Since it's illegal here we have a guy who grows the thing and we help him with costs not to feed drug dealers. I know this is my personal view but we all know that this scenario is far far more common than law enforcement would like to admit. And when it's white rich people they simply won't enforce the law even with much more problematic drugs.
Not to mention the obvious medicinal uses, the textile awesomeness of the fiber and other benefits.
The thing is, I'm not saying everyone should use and there are addiction issues but... What harm is there? How marijuana use is worse than artificially maintaining drug trafficking chains with all the associated violence? How is it worse than police brutality against whatever quantity a person is carrying? How the fuck is it worse than ALCOHOL?
It takes small amounts of critical thinking to realize that at the very least the current way of dealing with drugs perhaps isn't the smartest one.
Then you have conservatives.
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Decentralized Social Media Platform Mastodon Deals With An Influx Of Gab Users (2019)
Ultimately the target should be the awful individuals congregating over Gab instance and the ones running the infrastructure behind it. When somebody uses a gun to commit crimes we go after the gun manufacturer or the reseller? Unless they violate some law to sell the weapon to the hipothetical criminal they shouldn't be targeted. Same with mastodon. They cannot be responsible for how people use tools that are completely open source and easily replicated but the host for Gab's instance can be targeted if they knowingly host such speech.
Next >>