I read and share TechDirt because.... Similar to Jen Hoelzer (from previous story), I find TechDirt to be highly educational. You cover the stories that main-stream media won't, and you do so in what I see as being a fair and balanced way, including links to back up what you're saying and even giving opponents (not really the right word, but I can't think of a better one) an importunity to disagree. You don't censor comments for disagreeing with you. Even though I don't live in the USA, your posts are highly relevant to me. You've even managed to change my opinion of a few things (such as copyright) .. and, believe me, that's not an easy thing to do. You've done it, not by telling me I was wrong, by by simply presenting facts ... and explaining them in terms that even I can understand. I comment on TechDirt rarely; most often, what I would say has already been said by others.
Our interaction with Congress has been extensive....
Translating this, it means: "We've been asked a lot of hard-hitting questions by congress that we've had to think hard about before (1) evading the question (2) using misdirection to appear to answer the question without actually doing so, and/or (3) being somewhat "untruthful". But this is all ok, because (1) we're the NSA, (2) we didn't use a computer to do it, and (3) well, you know .. "terrorists" ...
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 23 Nov 2013 @ 3:22pm
Built in cameras
I remember being rather shocked when it reached the point where I couldn't get a laptop without a built in camera. It may seem a picky point, but I didn't (and still don't) want a camera that was ALWAYS available; when I want a web cam, I dig out my trusty old USB cam and plug it in. When I'm done, I unplug it. Initially, my response to built-in cameras was to disassemble the bezel and physically disconnect the offending hardware. These days, I simply cover it with black electrical tape - nearly invisible on the black bezel.
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 28 Jun 2013 @ 1:42pm
Expectation of privacy
"...because that information was clearly on your phone bill that the company sent to you each month..."
I wasn't aware that my phone bill was sent to anyone OTHER than me. Since, I believe, it's illegal for the postal service to knowingly deliver MY mail to anyone else and also for anyone to delibrately intercept my mail (except with a warrent, or course), why would I NOT have an expectation of privacy?
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 11 Jun 2013 @ 12:46pm
The Chinese don't have to spy on the US
Why would the Chinese (or Russians, or [insert adversarial nation of choice) go to the bother and expense to spy on the US? It's far more efficient to let the US government do it, and then simply download it from the NAS!
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 17 May 2013 @ 11:55am
Educational ....
One line in this article I found to be particularly educational: " There's the "flying device is dangerous if something goes wrong" argument...".
I was unaware, until now, that turning a device off magically attached an invisible tether to it so that it couldn't become a "flying object"!
This is why I love TechDirt; you learn something new every day.
"Copyright protection and licensing images are two elements that ensure the sustainability of a professional photographer’s career" - this is not really correct. Those elecments are nearly irrelevent; what sustains a professional photographers career is consistantly and continuously creating more new photos that people like.
Many professionals "create things" as part of their job; they don't get paid over and over for the same creation - they get paid ONCE. If they want paid again, they have to go out and create a new thing.
I "create" security systems. I get paid just once for each one. I don't get paid again each time it's used, or even each time "my creation" is sold. I get paid ONCE. If I want paid again, I have to create a new system.
(Anyone that asserts that this sort of "creation" is different than "artistic endevors" should go out and learn to do it - it is, in the hands of a truely creative person, truly an "art".)
It's always been easier to "shoot the messenger" than it has to "fix the problem" - this is true whether you're Google ... or a "Court of (theoretical) Justice"
This may be a silly question, but how can anyone be guilty of violating protection when there is no protection to violate? Open wi-fi is like hanging a 'welcome' sign out to anyone passing by.
In fact, the vacuum I use for work does not need to be plugged in to use it - it runs on rechargable batterys! Why? because electrical supply is spotty or unavailble in the places I work (construction sites). At home, if the power goes off, I can't see to vacuum anyway, so who cares if the vacuum doesn't work?
I know many people that live in areas with spotty cell phone coverage, and they have cell phones anyway. Why? because their cell phones work everywhere ELSE. For home, they use landlines.
So, MS's arguements fail .. because there ARE alternitives. For "always online DRM", this aren't any (legal) alternitives, making it an "apples and oranges" comparison.
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 18 Mar 2013 @ 3:48pm
Mission of Big Name News Media
"the mission of newspapers is to inform the public" - really? Seems to me their mission is to (1) make their big-money friends look good (no matter what they've done) and (2) make money by selling advertising and subscriptions. So they take the "news", wash it, spin it, sometimes candy coat it and then they publish it. Sometimes they even accidentally include some facts!
They decide what is "news worthy" and what isn't. They don't REPORT the news - they create it.
QuietgyInTheCorner (profile), 11 Feb 2013 @ 2:02pm
Using their math ...
A quick seearch of the internet for what percentage of the population participates in "less than legal" downloading,
I found estimates between 13% and 18%. Being generous, I'll double the high estimate ....
36% download
64% do not
Of the 36% that download, 44.8% of them [from article] (or 16.13% overall) pay nothing
if 60% overall don't pay [from article], and if only 16.13% are downloaders, then 43.87% of non-downloaders do not pay
so, only 56.13% of non-downloaders are paying customers
Now, to apply their own math to non-downloaders....
43.87% pay £0
56.13% pay £33.43
Therefore, non-downloaders must be spending an average £18.76 per year,
only 70% of what downloaders spend "on average"!
First of all, these sites do not CONSUME the content - the consumers (i.e. paying customers sent to the host site) "consume" the content. Consumers, I would add, that otherwise would not have found the host site at all.
In the process, the consumer is subjected to the host site's advertising and/or paywall, so the host still gets to collect it's pound of flesh.
If anything, the host site should be paying the service that is making it easier to find and access the host's goods for sending clients their way.
On the post: Cell Phones Need A Warrant, But Cell Site Location Info Doesn't? Appellants Challenge Government's Assertions
"equivalent of chatting with bystanders"?
On the post: What Makes You Tell Others About Techdirt?
Similar to Jen Hoelzer (from previous story), I find TechDirt to be highly educational. You cover the stories that main-stream media won't, and you do so in what I see as being a fair and balanced way, including links to back up what you're saying and even giving opponents (not really the right word, but I can't think of a better one) an importunity to disagree. You don't censor comments for disagreeing with you. Even though I don't live in the USA, your posts are highly relevant to me. You've even managed to change my opinion of a few things (such as copyright) .. and, believe me, that's not an easy thing to do. You've done it, not by telling me I was wrong, by by simply presenting facts ... and explaining them in terms that even I can understand.
I comment on TechDirt rarely; most often, what I would say has already been said by others.
On the post: NSA More Or Less Admits To Spying On Congress
Our interaction with Congress has been extensive....
"We've been asked a lot of hard-hitting questions by congress that we've had to think hard about before
(1) evading the question
(2) using misdirection to appear to answer the question without actually doing so, and/or
(3) being somewhat "untruthful".
But this is all ok, because
(1) we're the NSA,
(2) we didn't use a computer to do it, and
(3) well, you know .. "terrorists" ...
On the post: James Hogg's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Built in cameras
Initially, my response to built-in cameras was to disassemble the bezel and physically disconnect the offending hardware. These days, I simply cover it with black electrical tape - nearly invisible on the black bezel.
On the post: MPAA's Actions, Emails Show That They're Doing Everything Possible To Screw Over The Blind
Re:
If I quote you, are you going to sue me for infringement?
On the post: Latest Leak: NSA Collects Bulk Email Metadata On Americans
Expectation of privacy
I wasn't aware that my phone bill was sent to anyone OTHER than me. Since, I believe, it's illegal for the postal service to knowingly deliver MY mail to anyone else and also for anyone to delibrately intercept my mail (except with a warrent, or course), why would I NOT have an expectation of privacy?
On the post: Perhaps The NSA Should Figure Out How To Keep Its Own Stuff Secret Before Building A Giant Database
The Chinese don't have to spy on the US
On the post: Magic Hat Brewery Sues West Sixth Brewing, Claiming 6 Looks Too Much Like 9
On the post: Lots Of People Don't Turn Off Their Devices When They Fly
Educational ....
I was unaware, until now, that turning a device off magically attached an invisible tether to it so that it couldn't become a "flying object"!
This is why I love TechDirt; you learn something new every day.
On the post: American Photographic Artists Join The Lawsuit Against Google Books
Many professionals "create things" as part of their job; they don't get paid over and over for the same creation - they get paid ONCE. If they want paid again, they have to go out and create a new thing.
I "create" security systems. I get paid just once for each one. I don't get paid again each time it's used, or even each time "my creation" is sold. I get paid ONCE. If I want paid again, I have to create a new system.
(Anyone that asserts that this sort of "creation" is different than "artistic endevors" should go out and learn to do it - it is, in the hands of a truely creative person, truly an "art".)
On the post: Japan The Latest Country To Mistakenly Say Google Is 'Responsible' For Autocomplete Results
Shoot the messenger
On the post: Google Fined For Wi-Fi Privacy Violations, Grandstanding German Regulators Not Satisfied
Protection violation? what protection?
On the post: Microsoft Creative Director Defends Always-Online, Insults Customers, Murders Logic...All In One Day!
Vacuums and electricity
I know many people that live in areas with spotty cell phone coverage, and they have cell phones anyway. Why? because their cell phones work everywhere ELSE. For home, they use landlines.
So, MS's arguements fail .. because there ARE alternitives. For "always online DRM", this aren't any (legal) alternitives, making it an "apples and oranges" comparison.
On the post: WSJ Claims That Wikileaks Is Not Journalism But Espionage By Taking A Bunch Of Quotes Out Of Context
Mission of Big Name News Media
They decide what is "news worthy" and what isn't. They don't REPORT the news - they create it.
On the post: Lies, Damn Lies And Statistics: How The BPI Cherry Picks Its Averages To Pretend File Sharers Spend Less
Using their math ...
I found estimates between 13% and 18%. Being generous, I'll double the high estimate ....
36% download
64% do not
Of the 36% that download, 44.8% of them [from article] (or 16.13% overall) pay nothing
if 60% overall don't pay [from article], and if only 16.13% are downloaders, then 43.87% of non-downloaders do not pay
so, only 56.13% of non-downloaders are paying customers
Now, to apply their own math to non-downloaders....
43.87% pay £0
56.13% pay £33.43
Therefore, non-downloaders must be spending an average £18.76 per year,
only 70% of what downloaders spend "on average"!
On the post: People Overestimate The Value Of Content; Underestimate The Value Of A Service That Makes It Useful
Re: Rev share
In the process, the consumer is subjected to the host site's advertising and/or paywall, so the host still gets to collect it's pound of flesh.
If anything, the host site should be paying the service that is making it easier to find and access the host's goods for sending clients their way.
Next >>