I'm confused. Shouldn't "lawyers" (and Cathy is one) be able to represent patent applicants regardless of whether they are male or female? Why should we [society?] push to have FEMALE lawyers to represent FEMALE applicants -- shouldn't that just be done by ALL lawyers?
It seems to me, pardon my confusion, that
a. Anyone should be equally able to become a patent lawyer regardless of sex. Stop me if this is confusing.
b. Anyone who IS a patent lawyer should be able to represent a client regardless of his/her sex. Stop me if this is confusing also.
I don't think we "need more female lawyers". I think we need to ensure that egalitarian access to the law is there... and egalitarian access to practice law is there.
Sorry if I'm 100 years behind the times. I want to figure out what the problem is -- and fix it -- so everyone has equal rights, not make it about "some sexes bad, some sexes good."
It must, instead, be returned to the halls of the people’s democratically elected and publicly accountable representatives.
When we have publicly accountable representatives, let THEM make these specious arguments.
Until then, "Authorities" and "Officials" can suck my ....
Doesn't look like it stopped them figuring out the Nashville RV Bomber details. No phones there.
Dear:
"Authorities" -- no you're not on authority on anything
"Officials" -- yes you have a job so you're an official twit
"publicly accountable" -- no you're not
Your "rights to demand things" end just before your mouth starts moving.
That having been said, Larry Ellison is a piece of ****. He doesn't pass my "Patio Test". In simple words, if he came down my driveway he'd be told to turn around and go away, and not allowed on the patio.
There are lots of good people. Larry and Oracle are not.
CDA Section 230, Google, Facebook, non-copyrightable-APIs/ABIs are all good things. Larry ****inc Ellison is not.
Feel free to replace the asterisks with your epithet of choice. Mine rhymes with "duck".
To add detail, in the US minimum wage applies to employees, and typically do not work on a farm and are not independent contractors. The numbers (required minimum wages) for those "W-2 employees" varies from state to state, so when evaluating whether Xhamster pays their moderators below minimum wage one should consider among other things:
are these moderators employees (as in "W-2 recipients")
do they work the required minimum number of hours per week
do they get benefits
where do they physically reside. It is the place of residence of an employeethat determines the minimum wage, not the location of the business.
Wikipedia has an article but I won't link to it because
it's not a primary source of information
it says "workers" not "employees" and the laws are pretty clear on that distinction
As always, I'm not a lawyer, but when one starts to tell a business to pay ICs the same as FTEs one is showing a lack of understanding of what laws apply.
Backpage did nothing against the law. In fact, pre-VP-elect Kamala Harris testified (under oath) to Congress that she couldn't do anything about them. That's a complicated way of saying "Make laws, because they're not violating any."
Then she moved to arrest two BP execs [quickly released, charges dismissed, etc.] to cement her "success" as a "tough" prosecutor. I do like her better than the alternatives, but I don't like the hypocrisy.
BP didn't create sex trade. It allowed people not to have to go walk to the streets and risk their lives. The elimination of Craigslist and Backpage and other avenues doesn't REMOVE sex from the street; it just makes it much less safe.
Which is worse?
Sex workers are beat up on the street, give up money to pimps, and sometimes die
Websites make money
Take your time. You're in the comfort of your own home. Sex workers are out on the street.
I agree with you as a citizen who would love to know the facts of the case, and believe once it's filed in court it should be public.
I disagree on the concept that if the two businesses decide to take it out of court... whether on a settlement (like in this case), a stip (many cases), a pre-arranged resolution (like a divorce with a pre-nup) then it is up to the parties.
Analogy below as to divorce cases... which are really similar to this.
As a member of the public... as I've said, I REALLY WANT TO KNOW the details of this settlement. As a business owner I understand that sometimes the two sides may wish to work things out in private.
Divorce Analogy: Just because one person filed in court and the second person responded... if they decide to work out things privately because think of the kids ... that's their right. While it WAS filed in court OUR right as "the public" does not trump their right to remove it from the courts and "settle" it in person.
Just to make sure we're on the same page... I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW THE DETAILS OF THE SETTLEMENT... just not sure that overrides their right to keep it from me...
You've still missed the entire point of content-based moderation. It doesn't matter if Xhamster "employs unpaid volunteers" (a nonsense expression) or if they take something "seriously" or not or whether I do. I don't work for Xhamster so my commenting on it doesn't effect anything in their business.
What's important, and I've exhorted reading other people's writings... is that content-based moderation is somewhere between HARD and IMPOSSIBLE.
I know it's difficult to get but here's an analogy that may help:
Republicans say FaceBook censors their comments way too much
Democrats say FaceBook doesn't censor Republicans enough
A computer algorithm or an individual human or 10,000 of them cannot do that.
Now switch it off from "simple text" to a video clip someone has to watch, has to know background of, may have a database to compare it to, etc. and the "problem" that even FaceBook can't solve becomes exponentially more difficult.
We can't fix with "throwing more bodies at it" anything we can't fix to begin with.
TL;DR - to "solve" this technically is beyond current means.
Long answer:
To answer Mr. Abram, it's "Eks-Hamster". Not that it really matters, as you can pronounce it any way you like so long as you spell it right when you sign in. Like "Kubernetes". Seriously the debate can go all night long. Is it toe-may-toe or tuh-muh-toe?
As to the topic at hand, in a previous business I worked with an adult content creation business. They had hired a call-center's worth of people to review content and apply "tags". For example, without getting NSFW, tags like "grandma" and "bondage" would be added to videos to which that would be applied so that future searches would be able to find them. In other words, if one tagged some videos as "grandma" someone searching for "grandma" would find them.
The toll on my friend who worked there was huge. She worked normal hours (9-5 US or 0900-1700 EU) and she had breaks but the whole time she was there it was watching pornography, clicking on "tags" and then moving on to the next segment. Some were, as she described the experience, disturbing.
Moderation is an art. The moderator has to apply subjective judgment to evaluate whether a particular item fits or doesn't fit. A 480-page manual only hurts (but may shield liability for Xhamster down the road... but who is to say with today's wolves in congress.)
To have effective moderation there ought to be an OBJECTIVE standard, which is difficult because what's fine in California is not fine in South Carolina is not fine in Iraq and not fine in China. However, if such a standard could be defined, agreed upon (think international treaty) and codified, then an AI/Neural Net/cloud/crypto/blockchain/VC's-give-me-cash could be set up to do it.
As always I appreciate the Copia Institute op-eds. Questions and policy implications to consider are difficult to sum up, but starting with CSAM is simply a shift to "What about the children?" It's a consideration, to be sure, but THE VERY FIRST ONE? Children are not the primary users of the Internet or Xhamster.
Volunteer moderators and volunteer staff is just a money shift. It doesn't address any of the issues in moderation... just a question of how cheap your labor can get. If you get great free moderators and volunteers, good for you. If you can't, and you pay, and you get much better ones, good for you. The underlying issues (outlined above) don't change at all based on how much you pay the people who have to watch the content and make subjective decisions.
I'm from Israel and despise what this company does. I understand, as an investor at times, that shareholder value comes from revenue, which comes from sales, which requires customers. As Tim says "do not accept checks from this customer" makes good ethical sense, and good self-defense, but obviously not shareholder value.
This relates 100% to Mike's and Tim's many posts about how the creation of a backdoor to encryption (or a zero-day exploit to sell) ends up compromising EVERYTHING. It endangers everyone. Today Israel, tomorrow who knows.
Back doors - bad.
Zero day exploit sales - bad.
Shareholder value should be a valuation of short-term (let's get our stock price up TODAY) and long term (let's make our company worth more) goals. It is... an unfortunate effect that the focus is on the former.
Arizona [rabbit hole] rules about what's closed / open by whom
TL;DR - the "rules" are "fluid" with Tucson fighting Arizona.
Long version:
Yeah, I'm in Tucson, Arizona. The governor (R) has declined to close anything. The City of Tucson has attempted to work around that, and not to get too deep into politics... the City is fighting the State because the governor issued an exec. order saying nobody can override his non-closure order. For now that's in the "about to go to the courts" mode... and businesses are unsure about whose rules they should follow.
Bars - no.
Restaurants - yes.
Theaters - not no but not yes.
Gyms - no but that's also up in the same air
Malls - yes [although personally I think that's worse than bars!!!]
Some theaters ARE open, but showtimes, movie availability, etc. are not what existed pre-COVID. National chain Harkins has their outlets open but the "great" venues are not accepting online ticketing.
If I was a movie producer right now... I'd still go for streaming. The "fluid" situation makes people unwilling/uncomfortable to go to the three Harkins theaters (and the "indie" Loft Theater). The theaters typically pay a lot to acquire, schedule, and show the movies, and with few people willing to show up... schedules have become sparse.
So, technically, yes, theaters are open. Logistically, not so much. It's like having a freeway with 4 lanes but you don't know when you plan your trip whether you'll get 4, 3, 2, 1 or no lanes.
Movie stars want to have a luxury lifestyle. This requires an income. Movie studios provide this income... when they have an income (sometimes not ever, David Prowse RIP). Movie studios make money from various sources including sponsored elements and theater seats.
Movies employ THOUSANDS of people including those same stars, other actors, extras, animation experts, CGI processing firms, production firms, public relations, advertising, marketing, etc. etc. All these people have some need for income, be it rent, a mortgage, car payment, or even if they own all these things outright (in Los Angeles, Ha!) there are recurring payments for consumables such as food, fuel, utilities, telecommunications, ISP, etc. These people do not want to be out of money because we can't go to a theater.
So here we are, a year into a pandemic, 9 months into shutdown for some US states, 5 months in mine, and theaters are shuttered. That means to get all these people some money we can turn to the governments of the world. Most have come through. The US has some incompetence at the top so while there was one aid payment in March and another one slated for December, they are almost meaningless. Don't get me wrong, I think $600 is much better than $0, but that's my electric bill during a summer month.
Streaming allows the studio to release the "product", get some pay, pay the people listed above who helped create the "product" and everyone wins to some extent -- or if you're a pessimist, everyone loses less.
I have no love for AT&T. A tiger doesn't change its stripes and they are the hallmark of a monopolistic death-star-logo kill-the-competition sons of bitches. That having been said, I don't fault them for releasing online that which they can't release in theaters.
Obligatory comment on the whole "regions" thing on DVDs and Blu-Ray™ -- part of a scheme to leave out certain parts of the world from a current movie release. Now with streaming that crap is obviated.
AT&T, you suck, but streaming movies in a timely manner IN ALL PLACES EQUALLY is a good thing.
I apologize for only having 3 color bits, so I can only describe 8 colors as different. For me "magenta" is pink.
I wonder if Pink, the singer, would have had to change her name, because clearly she's a telecommunication company, competes with T-Mobile (/Deutsche Telekom), and causes undoubted customer confusion in the industry.
Government-provided monopolies (e.g. trademarks) are a godsend to prevent this from happening.
I have a lot of respect for Mr. Nolan. His movies -- including Inception, the Dark Knight Series, and Tenet [which I've yet to see] -- have received great acclaim. So... yes, he's a VERY talented director, and WikiPedia says over $5.1B of success [although of course there's more to a movie's success at the box office than a director].
HOWEVER, all that having been said, movie theaters in my state are shuttered. They have been closed for months. I can either watch things on streaming services, or download them to watch via PMS. One could argue that "If you can't watch them in the theater you should pay to stream them" but we've hashed/rehashed the 20+ streaming services that help you "be a cord-cutter" and are more of a hassle than freaking cable. [Not going to rehash that here].
So, sorry, Mr. Nolan. I respect your achievements, and you've obviously gotten to where you are (directing all the Dark Knight movies, geez, that's a resume builder!!) by being successful and talented. The problem here isn't AT&T or any other streaming service. Movie theaters are closed. COVID is rampant. Sorry that reality didn't intrude into your Hollywood or UK homes.
On the post: Senators Tell The USPTO To Remove The Arbitrary Obstacles Preventing Inventors (Especially Women Inventors) From Getting Patents
Sexism
I'm confused. Shouldn't "lawyers" (and Cathy is one) be able to represent patent applicants regardless of whether they are male or female? Why should we [society?] push to have FEMALE lawyers to represent FEMALE applicants -- shouldn't that just be done by ALL lawyers?
It seems to me, pardon my confusion, that
a. Anyone should be equally able to become a patent lawyer regardless of sex. Stop me if this is confusing.
b. Anyone who IS a patent lawyer should be able to represent a client regardless of his/her sex. Stop me if this is confusing also.
I don't think we "need more female lawyers". I think we need to ensure that egalitarian access to the law is there... and egalitarian access to practice law is there.
Sorry if I'm 100 years behind the times. I want to figure out what the problem is -- and fix it -- so everyone has equal rights, not make it about "some sexes bad, some sexes good."
E
On the post: Body Camera Footage Shows Cameras Aren't Making Boston Cops Better Police Officers
Cameras and behavior
Does Kanye West act less crazy on KUWTK? No.
Does Donald Trump act less stupid on The Apprentice. No.
Love Island, Married in 30 seconds, etc...
Is there ANY reality show in which people aren't their same stupid selves just because cameras are rolling? No.
Why do we expect cops to be different?
There are two types of cops: bad cops, and the ones who let them continue to be bad cops. Cameras won't change that.
The apple was rotting... rotting from within. - [para] Asimov, Foundation.
E
On the post: FTC's Misses Opportunity To Understand Social Media; Instead Goes For Weird Fishing Expedition Against Odd Grouping Of Companies
Re: Re: Illiteracy
You're the one on the hoist. How does it feel?
You still don't get it. This isn't about me or you. It's about the topic. Try reading instead of moving your argument-hole.
E
On the post: No Surprises Here: Presidential Commission On Law Enforcement Repeats Calls For Anti-Encryption Legislation
Representation
When we have publicly accountable representatives, let THEM make these specious arguments.
Until then, "Authorities" and "Officials" can suck my ....
Doesn't look like it stopped them figuring out the Nashville RV Bomber details. No phones there.
Dear:
"Authorities" -- no you're not on authority on anything
"Officials" -- yes you have a job so you're an official twit
"publicly accountable" -- no you're not
Your "rights to demand things" end just before your mouth starts moving.
E
On the post: When You Can't Innovate, You Litigate: Oracle Gleefully Takes Credit For Attacks On Section 230 And Google
Oracle isn't buying TikTok
https://www.theverge.com/2020/9/14/21436035/tiktok-oracle-deal-bytedance-president-trump-safety
That having been said, Larry Ellison is a piece of ****. He doesn't pass my "Patio Test". In simple words, if he came down my driveway he'd be told to turn around and go away, and not allowed on the patio.
There are lots of good people. Larry and Oracle are not.
CDA Section 230, Google, Facebook, non-copyrightable-APIs/ABIs are all good things. Larry ****inc Ellison is not.
Feel free to replace the asterisks with your epithet of choice. Mine rhymes with "duck".
E
On the post: FTC's Misses Opportunity To Understand Social Media; Instead Goes For Weird Fishing Expedition Against Odd Grouping Of Companies
Illiteracy
Sorry you think search engines will explain how to use semicolons.
You're wrong. Entirely wrong. That's not for me to say "where I learned it" but thanks for the "mom question."
Go get an education. Then when you respond to a two-week old post WRONGLY you might have a shot at making a point.
This wasn't it, junior.
Best.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
Minimum wages
To add detail, in the US minimum wage applies to employees, and typically do not work on a farm and are not independent contractors. The numbers (required minimum wages) for those "W-2 employees" varies from state to state, so when evaluating whether Xhamster pays their moderators below minimum wage one should consider among other things:
See https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/mw-consolidated for the table of what each state has passed.
Wikipedia has an article but I won't link to it because
As always, I'm not a lawyer, but when one starts to tell a business to pay ICs the same as FTEs one is showing a lack of understanding of what laws apply.
None of this applies to farms. (see link above).
Ehud
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
Re: minimum wage
In which state? All have differing minimum wages. That's just in the United States.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
BackPage
Backpage did nothing against the law. In fact, pre-VP-elect Kamala Harris testified (under oath) to Congress that she couldn't do anything about them. That's a complicated way of saying "Make laws, because they're not violating any."
Then she moved to arrest two BP execs [quickly released, charges dismissed, etc.] to cement her "success" as a "tough" prosecutor. I do like her better than the alternatives, but I don't like the hypocrisy.
BP didn't create sex trade. It allowed people not to have to go walk to the streets and risk their lives. The elimination of Craigslist and Backpage and other avenues doesn't REMOVE sex from the street; it just makes it much less safe.
Which is worse?
Take your time. You're in the comfort of your own home. Sex workers are out on the street.
E
On the post: The Mystery Of The Copyright On Sherlock Holmes' Emotions Goes Unsolved Due To Settlement
Re: Should confidential settlements be allowed?
I agree with you as a citizen who would love to know the facts of the case, and believe once it's filed in court it should be public.
I disagree on the concept that if the two businesses decide to take it out of court... whether on a settlement (like in this case), a stip (many cases), a pre-arranged resolution (like a divorce with a pre-nup) then it is up to the parties.
Analogy below as to divorce cases... which are really similar to this.
As a member of the public... as I've said, I REALLY WANT TO KNOW the details of this settlement. As a business owner I understand that sometimes the two sides may wish to work things out in private.
Divorce Analogy: Just because one person filed in court and the second person responded... if they decide to work out things privately because think of the kids ... that's their right. While it WAS filed in court OUR right as "the public" does not trump their right to remove it from the courts and "settle" it in person.
Just to make sure we're on the same page... I WOULD LOVE TO KNOW THE DETAILS OF THE SETTLEMENT... just not sure that overrides their right to keep it from me...
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
Re:
You've still missed the entire point of content-based moderation. It doesn't matter if Xhamster "employs unpaid volunteers" (a nonsense expression) or if they take something "seriously" or not or whether I do. I don't work for Xhamster so my commenting on it doesn't effect anything in their business.
What's important, and I've exhorted reading other people's writings... is that content-based moderation is somewhere between HARD and IMPOSSIBLE.
I know it's difficult to get but here's an analogy that may help:
A computer algorithm or an individual human or 10,000 of them cannot do that.
Now switch it off from "simple text" to a video clip someone has to watch, has to know background of, may have a database to compare it to, etc. and the "problem" that even FaceBook can't solve becomes exponentially more difficult.
We can't fix with "throwing more bodies at it" anything we can't fix to begin with.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
Re:
"Professional staff to moderate content"???
You've missed the whole point.
Try reading the original article. Then read anything Mike or Tim have wrote about moderation. Once you have that concept read what I wrote.
THEN when you can FIX MODERATION for WEBSITES IN THE WORLD, speak up.
E
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: Xhamster, The 22nd Biggest Site On The Internet, Moderates Content Using Unpaid Volunteers (2020)
Moderation - again
TL;DR - to "solve" this technically is beyond current means.
Long answer:
To answer Mr. Abram, it's "Eks-Hamster". Not that it really matters, as you can pronounce it any way you like so long as you spell it right when you sign in. Like "Kubernetes". Seriously the debate can go all night long. Is it toe-may-toe or tuh-muh-toe?
As to the topic at hand, in a previous business I worked with an adult content creation business. They had hired a call-center's worth of people to review content and apply "tags". For example, without getting NSFW, tags like "grandma" and "bondage" would be added to videos to which that would be applied so that future searches would be able to find them. In other words, if one tagged some videos as "grandma" someone searching for "grandma" would find them.
The toll on my friend who worked there was huge. She worked normal hours (9-5 US or 0900-1700 EU) and she had breaks but the whole time she was there it was watching pornography, clicking on "tags" and then moving on to the next segment. Some were, as she described the experience, disturbing.
Moderation is an art. The moderator has to apply subjective judgment to evaluate whether a particular item fits or doesn't fit. A 480-page manual only hurts (but may shield liability for Xhamster down the road... but who is to say with today's wolves in congress.)
To have effective moderation there ought to be an OBJECTIVE standard, which is difficult because what's fine in California is not fine in South Carolina is not fine in Iraq and not fine in China. However, if such a standard could be defined, agreed upon (think international treaty) and codified, then an AI/Neural Net/cloud/crypto/blockchain/VC's-give-me-cash could be set up to do it.
As always I appreciate the Copia Institute op-eds. Questions and policy implications to consider are difficult to sum up, but starting with CSAM is simply a shift to "What about the children?" It's a consideration, to be sure, but THE VERY FIRST ONE? Children are not the primary users of the Internet or Xhamster.
Volunteer moderators and volunteer staff is just a money shift. It doesn't address any of the issues in moderation... just a question of how cheap your labor can get. If you get great free moderators and volunteers, good for you. If you can't, and you pay, and you get much better ones, good for you. The underlying issues (outlined above) don't change at all based on how much you pay the people who have to watch the content and make subjective decisions.
My 2¢ worth.
Ehud Gavron
Tucson Arizona US
On the post: Israel's NSO Group Exploits And Malware Again Being Used To Target Journalists In The Middle East
Ethics
I'm from Israel and despise what this company does. I understand, as an investor at times, that shareholder value comes from revenue, which comes from sales, which requires customers. As Tim says "do not accept checks from this customer" makes good ethical sense, and good self-defense, but obviously not shareholder value.
This relates 100% to Mike's and Tim's many posts about how the creation of a backdoor to encryption (or a zero-day exploit to sell) ends up compromising EVERYTHING. It endangers everyone. Today Israel, tomorrow who knows.
Back doors - bad.
Zero day exploit sales - bad.
Shareholder value should be a valuation of short-term (let's get our stock price up TODAY) and long term (let's make our company worth more) goals. It is... an unfortunate effect that the focus is on the former.
E
On the post: AT&T Pisses Off Everybody (Especially Christopher Nolan) For Launching Movies Straight To Streaming
Arizona [rabbit hole] rules about what's closed / open by whom
TL;DR - the "rules" are "fluid" with Tucson fighting Arizona.
Long version:
Yeah, I'm in Tucson, Arizona. The governor (R) has declined to close anything. The City of Tucson has attempted to work around that, and not to get too deep into politics... the City is fighting the State because the governor issued an exec. order saying nobody can override his non-closure order. For now that's in the "about to go to the courts" mode... and businesses are unsure about whose rules they should follow.
Bars - no.
Restaurants - yes.
Theaters - not no but not yes.
Gyms - no but that's also up in the same air
Malls - yes [although personally I think that's worse than bars!!!]
Some theaters ARE open, but showtimes, movie availability, etc. are not what existed pre-COVID. National chain Harkins has their outlets open but the "great" venues are not accepting online ticketing.
If I was a movie producer right now... I'd still go for streaming. The "fluid" situation makes people unwilling/uncomfortable to go to the three Harkins theaters (and the "indie" Loft Theater). The theaters typically pay a lot to acquire, schedule, and show the movies, and with few people willing to show up... schedules have become sparse.
So, technically, yes, theaters are open. Logistically, not so much. It's like having a freeway with 4 lanes but you don't know when you plan your trip whether you'll get 4, 3, 2, 1 or no lanes.
E
On the post: AT&T Pisses Off Everybody (Especially Christopher Nolan) For Launching Movies Straight To Streaming
Economics...
Movie stars want to have a luxury lifestyle. This requires an income. Movie studios provide this income... when they have an income (sometimes not ever, David Prowse RIP). Movie studios make money from various sources including sponsored elements and theater seats.
Movies employ THOUSANDS of people including those same stars, other actors, extras, animation experts, CGI processing firms, production firms, public relations, advertising, marketing, etc. etc. All these people have some need for income, be it rent, a mortgage, car payment, or even if they own all these things outright (in Los Angeles, Ha!) there are recurring payments for consumables such as food, fuel, utilities, telecommunications, ISP, etc. These people do not want to be out of money because we can't go to a theater.
So here we are, a year into a pandemic, 9 months into shutdown for some US states, 5 months in mine, and theaters are shuttered. That means to get all these people some money we can turn to the governments of the world. Most have come through. The US has some incompetence at the top so while there was one aid payment in March and another one slated for December, they are almost meaningless. Don't get me wrong, I think $600 is much better than $0, but that's my electric bill during a summer month.
Streaming allows the studio to release the "product", get some pay, pay the people listed above who helped create the "product" and everyone wins to some extent -- or if you're a pessimist, everyone loses less.
I have no love for AT&T. A tiger doesn't change its stripes and they are the hallmark of a monopolistic death-star-logo kill-the-competition sons of bitches. That having been said, I don't fault them for releasing online that which they can't release in theaters.
Obligatory comment on the whole "regions" thing on DVDs and Blu-Ray™ -- part of a scheme to leave out certain parts of the world from a current movie release. Now with streaming that crap is obviated.
AT&T, you suck, but streaming movies in a timely manner IN ALL PLACES EQUALLY is a good thing.
There's my 2¢. That's $50 Canadian I think.
E
On the post: AT&T Pisses Off Everybody (Especially Christopher Nolan) For Launching Movies Straight To Streaming
Pretty girls
Everyone's attractive in one way or another. Except spammers who should die.
I added a Turing test to my home phone (VoIP *) and have been happy since. I wish we could did the same for spammers consuming oxygen.
On the post: Lemonade Beats Deutsche Telekom In French Court Over Use Of The Color Magenta
Pink
I apologize for only having 3 color bits, so I can only describe 8 colors as different. For me "magenta" is pink.
I wonder if Pink, the singer, would have had to change her name, because clearly she's a telecommunication company, competes with T-Mobile (/Deutsche Telekom), and causes undoubted customer confusion in the industry.
Government-provided monopolies (e.g. trademarks) are a godsend to prevent this from happening.
I can't personally imagine my personal horror if I went to buy a T-Mobile phone and ended up with https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mW1dbiD_zDk
Thank you, French Government. USPTO, are you listening? If not, check out the link.
Ehud
On the post: AT&T Pisses Off Everybody (Especially Christopher Nolan) For Launching Movies Straight To Streaming
Re: Dated metaphor
If the cover is missing, you shouldn't have paid anything for it, as it's probably been reported stolen... ;-)
Happy Holiday Season.
E
On the post: AT&T Pisses Off Everybody (Especially Christopher Nolan) For Launching Movies Straight To Streaming
Respect... but...
I have a lot of respect for Mr. Nolan. His movies -- including Inception, the Dark Knight Series, and Tenet [which I've yet to see] -- have received great acclaim. So... yes, he's a VERY talented director, and WikiPedia says over $5.1B of success [although of course there's more to a movie's success at the box office than a director].
HOWEVER, all that having been said, movie theaters in my state are shuttered. They have been closed for months. I can either watch things on streaming services, or download them to watch via PMS. One could argue that "If you can't watch them in the theater you should pay to stream them" but we've hashed/rehashed the 20+ streaming services that help you "be a cord-cutter" and are more of a hassle than freaking cable. [Not going to rehash that here].
So, sorry, Mr. Nolan. I respect your achievements, and you've obviously gotten to where you are (directing all the Dark Knight movies, geez, that's a resume builder!!) by being successful and talented. The problem here isn't AT&T or any other streaming service. Movie theaters are closed. COVID is rampant. Sorry that reality didn't intrude into your Hollywood or UK homes.
Ehud
Next >>