In fact, in locations with spotty connections, you'll sometimes notice Google halting autosearch and asking you to "press enter to search" - the same thing it says when you type "bitt" now. So many people who encounter this 'filter' will never think anything of it.
Amusingly, this very thing was pointed out in PCWorld's article about this. I just tried it myself.
This is mindblowing. A search phrase that's *clearly* only used when you want to infringe: pirate bay, is okay. Like there's anything else you'd be looking for. "Oh, I was wondering if there are any bays out there that pirates like to frequent that's all." But "torrent" - a word that could mean swiftly flowing water, a downpour of rain, or just generically torrenting legal data - god forbid you search THAT
No! That's my second favorite webcomic, next to Sluggy Freelance!
Though ironically, this means they ARE following the in-universe version of their book, "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates". Like number 13: "Do unto others." or number 16: "Don't be afraid to be the first to resort to violence"
And probably the most apt, number 21: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Take his fish away and tell him he's lucky just to be alive, and he'll figure out how to catch another one for you to take tomorrow."
Re: Re: Re: Not Free- You just Don't understand business principles
Right. The subscription payment has traditionally only meant to be a way to create exclusivity, for the purpose of implying respectability. A "this news is more legitimate because the unwashed masses don't have their grubby hands on it" sort of thing. Any costs actually covered by the subscription price are purely a nice side effect.
Exclusivity and respect are defined differently on the web. In fact, it's almost the *reverse* on the web, since Paywalls are commonly associated with sleazy porn sites. Food for thought.
The only reason advertising is not the same slam dunk it is in print is because advertisers have no way of getting any useful information about user response metrics regarding their ads, aside from subscription numbers. This gives magazine publishers power. On the web, advertisers get a veritable bounty of data to poke through and make judgments on. This gives *them* power.
With the power balance out of whack, it's actually a miracle that anyone makes money off of ads at all...and yet they still do somehow. Probably because the webmasters' power is transferred to the development community as a whole, but this is still weaker than having a nice, imbalanced direct relationship.
If you want to know what's hurting the web, it's not the "people who want things for free" (a category that either effectively doesn't exist, or comprises everyone in the world), it's the easy availability of overly nuanced metrics. TV has the right idea - the ratings system is built off fuzzy math with vague statistics based off a pool of 1% of the U.S. population, which isn't even fairly distributed across the country. It's brilliant.
Um...he uploaded them to Wikileaks. The documents and video ended up in their database with no author attribution because that's how Wikileaks works. Then the people who run Wikileaks reviewed said information unaware of Manning's existence, and decided to upload it - a decision provably independent of Manning's intent.
This is not a mystery, and it doesn't count as conspiracy, as it's defined by U.S. law. Hence why they're admitting, *themselves*, that there is no link between them.
What it negates is the ability for the prosecutors to say they have any hard evidence to that effect whatsoever. That's sort of the reason for this story's existence. The investigators wouldn't dare admit this unless they've given up on this tack altogether.
Basically, this is just a preamble to them focusing entirely on Manning to the exclusion of Assange.
Re: Re: Re: Of Course, The Old “Play Back Recorded Footage To Fool The Security Monitors” Trick
I was thinking specifically of tricks to fool enemy cameras, but it's true that historically we've come up with all sorts of clever ways to fool the enemy's eye.
Re: Of Course, The Old “Play Back Recorded Footage To Fool The Security Monitors” Trick
I feel like there may have been an even older heist movie that used this technique. Although I guess there'd be a hard line delineating when the first instance could have occurred, since it wouldn't have happened before the invention of video security.
lol, I'm pretty sure the only thing playing the "until proven guilty" card is that pesky U.S. Constitution. Don't ya jus' hate that silly ol' thang?? Sum1 shud jus take 'er out back, y'know wut ah mean?!
Aside from the tired ad hominem, I'd like to point out that on average, pirates are hobbyists who don't profit off sharing music, whereas what the record labels were doing here is ACTUALLY MAKING MONEY. They engaged in infringement, and then endeavored to make a profit off of that infringement, something orders of magnitude worse than what the typical pirate does. Yet they managed to get off only paying out $150 per artist.
From a civil standpoint, if I was that casino, I would sue the HELL out of that slot manufacturer for negligence in selling me a faulty product that put my business at risk. Which is pretty much what Mike is suggesting here in so many words. Why *wouldn't* I?
To say the manufacture bears no responsibility whatsoever, simply because they didn't do the stealing, is naive.
That's an interesting theory. Maybe this is all preparation for his next installation, which will be a sculpture of the cease and desist letters he's sending out.
That this need to be leaked at all is silly. Security through obscurity anyone? If the method actually works, it will be irrelevant whether it's public knowledge or not.
On the post: Will Google's New Hamfisted Censorship On Autocomplete Raise Questions Of Human Meddling?
Re:
On the post: Will Google's New Hamfisted Censorship On Autocomplete Raise Questions Of Human Meddling?
Re: False positives, false negatives
This is mindblowing. A search phrase that's *clearly* only used when you want to infringe: pirate bay, is okay. Like there's anything else you'd be looking for. "Oh, I was wondering if there are any bays out there that pirates like to frequent that's all." But "torrent" - a word that could mean swiftly flowing water, a downpour of rain, or just generically torrenting legal data - god forbid you search THAT
On the post: FranklinCovey Sending A Trademark C&D Over '7 Habits' Appears To Violate A Few Of The '7 Habits'
Though ironically, this means they ARE following the in-universe version of their book, "The Seven Habits of Highly Effective Pirates". Like number 13: "Do unto others." or number 16: "Don't be afraid to be the first to resort to violence"
And probably the most apt, number 21: "Give a man a fish, feed him for a day. Take his fish away and tell him he's lucky just to be alive, and he'll figure out how to catch another one for you to take tomorrow."
On the post: Details Leak For The NY Times Paywall
Re: Re: Re: Not Free- You just Don't understand business principles
Exclusivity and respect are defined differently on the web. In fact, it's almost the *reverse* on the web, since Paywalls are commonly associated with sleazy porn sites. Food for thought.
On the post: Details Leak For The NY Times Paywall
Re: Re: Re:
With the power balance out of whack, it's actually a miracle that anyone makes money off of ads at all...and yet they still do somehow. Probably because the webmasters' power is transferred to the development community as a whole, but this is still weaker than having a nice, imbalanced direct relationship.
If you want to know what's hurting the web, it's not the "people who want things for free" (a category that either effectively doesn't exist, or comprises everyone in the world), it's the easy availability of overly nuanced metrics. TV has the right idea - the ratings system is built off fuzzy math with vague statistics based off a pool of 1% of the U.S. population, which isn't even fairly distributed across the country. It's brilliant.
On the post: Obama Nominates Former Top RIAA Lawyer To Be Solicitor General
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think they cover that in grade school. Head's up.
On the post: US Investigators Can't Find Any Direct Connection Between Manning And Assange
Re: Re: Re:
This is not a mystery, and it doesn't count as conspiracy, as it's defined by U.S. law. Hence why they're admitting, *themselves*, that there is no link between them.
On the post: US Investigators Can't Find Any Direct Connection Between Manning And Assange
Re:
Basically, this is just a preamble to them focusing entirely on Manning to the exclusion of Assange.
On the post: Stuxnet Increasingly Sounding Like A Movie Plot
Re: Re: Re: Of Course, The Old “Play Back Recorded Footage To Fool The Security Monitors” Trick
On the post: Woman Arrested For Recording Attempt To Report Police Officer Who Sexually Assaulted Her
Re: Re: Free press
Who watches the watchmen, remember?
On the post: US Customs & Border Patrol Protecting America From Chocolate Toy Eggs (And Charging You For The Privilege)
Re: Re: Re: Wonder Ball
On the post: Stuxnet Increasingly Sounding Like A Movie Plot
Re: missing questions
In fact, I believe there was an earlier story that suggested there was.
On the post: Stuxnet Increasingly Sounding Like A Movie Plot
Re: Of Course, The Old “Play Back Recorded Footage To Fool The Security Monitors” Trick
On the post: Press Realizing That Treatment Of Bradley Manning Is Indefensible
Re: Re: Re:
I mean, go head, guess away! Just don't try submitting it as evidence, okay?
On the post: Press Realizing That Treatment Of Bradley Manning Is Indefensible
Re:
On the post: Major Record Labels Agree To Pay $45 Million For Copyright Infringement In Canada
Re:
On the post: Is Figuring Out A Slot Machine Software Glitch & Making Money From It A Crime?
Re: Re: Re: Re: mis-use & hacking
To say the manufacture bears no responsibility whatsoever, simply because they didn't do the stealing, is naive.
On the post: Appropriation Artist Jeff Koons Threatens Company & Retailers For Selling Classic Balloon Dog Bookends
Re:
On the post: US Gov't Strategy To Prevent Leaks Is Leaked
On the post: Should MySpace Friends & Photos Be Enough Evidence To Convict Someone Of Criminal Gang Activity
Re: I was on a jury
Next >>