If the Chinese don't like the wall, then we'll build it higher. And we'll make them pay for it.
This will be the best wall ever. And believe me, I know my walls. Everyone will just love it. I will build you the best wall you've ever seen, trust me on this. I know what I'm talking about when it comes to walls. Classy beautiful walls. Make America Respected Again! This will make other countries take notice and respect America. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about.
The government should let everyone use encryption.
Not just the government.
But please !!! Please use the kind of magical encryption that law enforcement can read, but hackers cannot read.
If it doesn't exist it can be invented. Or if not invented, it could at least be patented, which is just as valuable in court as being actually invented.
Forget about progress of the arts and science. Isn't copyright all about making sure artists get paid?
Without copyright, how would macaque monkeys get paid? And thus what incentive would they have to create additional copyrightable works?
And please don't argue about artistry or creativity of macaque monkeys. The creative works of macaque monkeys are at least on a par with most of what Hollywood churns out.
Not only wouldn't the macaque monkeys get paid, but neither would the monopolist gatekeepers who exploit and represent them. Just like with other artists and creators.
Without the income from copyright, how would macaque monkeys enjoy the finer things in life?
Without regulation, there is not only the (very high) risk of a monopoly, but other risks. Unchecked greed knows no bounds. * fees, extra fees, and more fees * high prices * poor quality * outrageous contract terms * polluting our air and water, just, because they can! Who's going to stop them? * requiring your firstborn, buried somewhere in fine print * harvesting your organs, to increase executive bonuses
It makes me sick when people say no regulation is needed. The behavior of companies in an absence of regulation proves the need for regulation.
It makes me even sicker to hear a politication, like in a state, such as Texas, say something like "we can't have regulation, this is a pro-business state". Here's a clue: behaving as if you are part of the community, instead of trying to exploit it, and it's natural resources -- IS GOOD BUSINESS, for the long term. Not just this quarter.
Privacy should be the default state, and if they want my personal information, they should enter into negotiations for how much they are willing to pay me for that information.
I had hoped it was clear that I do not blame the free market. I thought I had pointed out that Comcast operates effectively as a monopolist without the pressures of free market forces.
I also hoped it was obvious that regulation is how to fix the lack of a free market. I had hoped the example of organ harvesting made that clear. I suppose if Comcast demanded organ harvesting in exchange for working service, that regulators could possibly do something about that. (Although whether they actually would might depend upon campaign contributions -- which could outweigh the public outcry over comcast harvesting people's organs.)
The government is obviously anti-business. Trying to enforce unnecessary regulation upon poor beleaguered Comcast.
Why shouldn't Comcast be able to charge extra fees for: * privacy * service that actually works * acceptable levels of service * protection from comcast employees intruding onto your property unannounced and for unspecified purposes * a premium service agreement without the standard clause allowing comcast to harvest your, and your family's organs
Comcast strongly supports letting the free market forces decide . . . as long as comcast is the ONLY player allowed in that market.
The government should not be trying to tell Comcast how to run its business. After all, Comcast is an award winning company, year after year winning awards for worst service and most hated company.
All the right incentives for police to wrongfully seize as many vehicles as possible, as often as possible.
Corollary:
A for-profit prison system will guarantee: * arrests are made even when unnecessary (so the prison makes money holding someone innocent) * more ordinary things become criminal offenses * an education system that turns out a steady stream of some percentage of poorly educated people, unable to get good jobs, more likely to commit crimes, and end up in profitable prisons.
Hey, here's an idea! Police officers should be able to randomly require people to get a blood test at a DUI checkpoint. If you want expedited service so you can be proven innocent and be on your way, you can pay a fee to expedite.
I bet we could find all sorts of new profit centers based on law enforcement and the judicial system. It's the best new money making idea since red light cameras and shortening the length of the yellow light.
Maybe law enforcement and the judicial system need to operate more like a business. Coming soon . . . shareholders.
A better analogy is that the company who made your locks is still able to open it.
Apple is like a lock company that has made a lock that they, themselves, cannot open.
What the police state wants is to go back to the time when the lock company, or a locksmith, could open your lock and sneak in, rummage around, plant evidence, and then leave without a trace.
From TFA . . . > LCS and Piscount are both subsidiaries of Getty, and both sent > Highsmith letters demanding payment. It's almost as if Getty's > PR people have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.
If Highsmith had sent a payment to Getty would she have received: 1. all of that payment back 2. a portion of that payment back 3. none of that payment back
Or asked a different way. When Getty charges for a public domain work, and they know it is public domain, do they keep all of the payment for themselves?
What if it is NOT a public domain work, but is available royalty free? Can Getty charge a large fee for it, but keep all of that fee, claiming it is not a royalty, but merely a 'service' fee for providing access to the royalty free copyrighted work?
Can Getty's system even keep track of whether a work is covered by copyright, and whether a copyright work is royalty free? If so, would it be advantageous for Getty to make those images available for free as a convenience to their users. Or is CwF+RtB too radical and idea, or perhaps simply inconceivable.
And as a final question, why would anyone expect PR people to have any clue about what they are talking about? Doesn't such an expectation seem prima facie unreasonable?
Re: Considering that this is the company that installed rootkits on CD's
Sony installed the rootkits into innocent people's PCs.
Costing each victim probably at least $100 or more to have their PC repaired.
And then Sony justified it as okay with "most people don't even know what a rootkit is".
That's like saying: most people don't even know what ${X} is. Where ${X} is one of: * salmonella * radiation * (insert favorite heavy metal poison most people have never heard of) * (insert name of little known RIAA musician)
On the post: Donald Trump On Intellectual Property: China Is Bad
Dear Mr. Trump: Just build a wall around China
This will be the best wall ever. And believe me, I know my walls. Everyone will just love it. I will build you the best wall you've ever seen, trust me on this. I know what I'm talking about when it comes to walls. Classy beautiful walls. Make America Respected Again! This will make other countries take notice and respect America. Believe me, I know what I'm talking about.
On the post: Will DNC Email Hacking Make Legislators More Friendly To Encryption?
Government has decided NOT to ban encryption!
Banning encryption would make us all less safe.
Instead, the government has invested effort in developing the strongest possible encryption key. The strength of this key will keep us all safe.
Everyone must begin using this encryption key immediately.
People who refuse are obviously up to no good.
On the post: Will DNC Email Hacking Make Legislators More Friendly To Encryption?
Re: Re: Legislators need practical explanations
Not just the government.
But please !!! Please use the kind of magical encryption that law enforcement can read, but hackers cannot read.
If it doesn't exist it can be invented. Or if not invented, it could at least be patented, which is just as valuable in court as being actually invented.
On the post: Primatologist Tells Court That Macaque Monkeys Are, Like, Super Smart, So They Should Totally Get Copyrights
Re: Re: Re: "To promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts, and Incentivize the Creation of Random Noises..."
This is the 21st century, and it is unclear which one the police would lock up today. So you need to be clear.
On the post: Primatologist Tells Court That Macaque Monkeys Are, Like, Super Smart, So They Should Totally Get Copyrights
But Macaque Monkeys need to get paid!
Without copyright, how would macaque monkeys get paid? And thus what incentive would they have to create additional copyrightable works?
And please don't argue about artistry or creativity of macaque monkeys. The creative works of macaque monkeys are at least on a par with most of what Hollywood churns out.
Not only wouldn't the macaque monkeys get paid, but neither would the monopolist gatekeepers who exploit and represent them. Just like with other artists and creators.
Without the income from copyright, how would macaque monkeys enjoy the finer things in life?
On the post: Comcast Tells The FCC It Should Be Able To Charge Broadband Users A Premium For Privacy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Again Government Overreach
* fees, extra fees, and more fees
* high prices
* poor quality
* outrageous contract terms
* polluting our air and water, just, because they can! Who's going to stop them?
* requiring your firstborn, buried somewhere in fine print
* harvesting your organs, to increase executive bonuses
It makes me sick when people say no regulation is needed. The behavior of companies in an absence of regulation proves the need for regulation.
It makes me even sicker to hear a politication, like in a state, such as Texas, say something like "we can't have regulation, this is a pro-business state". Here's a clue: behaving as if you are part of the community, instead of trying to exploit it, and it's natural resources -- IS GOOD BUSINESS, for the long term. Not just this quarter.
On the post: Comcast Tells The FCC It Should Be Able To Charge Broadband Users A Premium For Privacy
Re:
On the post: Comcast Tells The FCC It Should Be Able To Charge Broadband Users A Premium For Privacy
Re: Re: Again Government Overreach
I also hoped it was obvious that regulation is how to fix the lack of a free market. I had hoped the example of organ harvesting made that clear. I suppose if Comcast demanded organ harvesting in exchange for working service, that regulators could possibly do something about that. (Although whether they actually would might depend upon campaign contributions -- which could outweigh the public outcry over comcast harvesting people's organs.)
On the post: Comcast Tells The FCC It Should Be Able To Charge Broadband Users A Premium For Privacy
Again Government Overreach
Why shouldn't Comcast be able to charge extra fees for:
* privacy
* service that actually works
* acceptable levels of service
* protection from comcast employees intruding onto your property unannounced and for unspecified purposes
* a premium service agreement without the standard clause allowing comcast to harvest your, and your family's organs
Comcast strongly supports letting the free market forces decide . . . as long as comcast is the ONLY player allowed in that market.
The government should not be trying to tell Comcast how to run its business. After all, Comcast is an award winning company, year after year winning awards for worst service and most hated company.
On the post: Arizona Law Enforcement Charging Innocent Car Owners $2,000 To Reclaim Their Wrongfully-Seized Vehicles
This creates all the right incentives
Corollary:
A for-profit prison system will guarantee:
* arrests are made even when unnecessary (so the prison makes money holding someone innocent)
* more ordinary things become criminal offenses
* an education system that turns out a steady stream of some percentage of poorly educated people, unable to get good jobs, more likely to commit crimes, and end up in profitable prisons.
Hey, here's an idea!
Police officers should be able to randomly require people to get a blood test at a DUI checkpoint. If you want expedited service so you can be proven innocent and be on your way, you can pay a fee to expedite.
I bet we could find all sorts of new profit centers based on law enforcement and the judicial system. It's the best new money making idea since red light cameras and shortening the length of the yellow light.
Maybe law enforcement and the judicial system need to operate more like a business. Coming soon . . . shareholders.
Creating all the wrong incentives
On the post: Washington State Sues Comcast For Routinely Ripping Off Its Customers
Government Overreach?
(for the sarcasm impaired, I hope Comcast has to pay restitution and a very fine fine.)
On the post: Manhattan DA Continues To Claim 'We Don't Want Crypto Backdoors...' By Which He Means He Wants Crypto Backdoors
Re: Same argument, different level of tech
Apple is like a lock company that has made a lock that they, themselves, cannot open.
What the police state wants is to go back to the time when the lock company, or a locksmith, could open your lock and sneak in, rummage around, plant evidence, and then leave without a trace.
On the post: Getty Makes Nonsensical Statement On Photographer Carol Highsmith's Lawsuit For Falsely Claiming Copyright
Re:
On the post: Getty Makes Nonsensical Statement On Photographer Carol Highsmith's Lawsuit For Falsely Claiming Copyright
Re: Re: Artists need to get paid
Can Getty's system keep track of what various requirements there are for images which are royalty free, as long as certain conditions are met?
The customer getting the images from Getty would need to be made aware of these conditions as a pre-condition to paying for the images.
On the post: Getty Makes Nonsensical Statement On Photographer Carol Highsmith's Lawsuit For Falsely Claiming Copyright
Artists need to get paid
> LCS and Piscount are both subsidiaries of Getty, and both sent
> Highsmith letters demanding payment. It's almost as if Getty's
> PR people have absolutely no clue what they're talking about.
If Highsmith had sent a payment to Getty would she have received:
1. all of that payment back
2. a portion of that payment back
3. none of that payment back
Or asked a different way. When Getty charges for a public domain work, and they know it is public domain, do they keep all of the payment for themselves?
What if it is NOT a public domain work, but is available royalty free? Can Getty charge a large fee for it, but keep all of that fee, claiming it is not a royalty, but merely a 'service' fee for providing access to the royalty free copyrighted work?
Can Getty's system even keep track of whether a work is covered by copyright, and whether a copyright work is royalty free? If so, would it be advantageous for Getty to make those images available for free as a convenience to their users. Or is CwF+RtB too radical and idea, or perhaps simply inconceivable.
And as a final question, why would anyone expect PR people to have any clue about what they are talking about? Doesn't such an expectation seem prima facie unreasonable?
On the post: Irony: Sony Pictures Sued For Failing To Stop Piracy
Re:
You mean offering a short term rental for 2.99, and a longer term rental for 9.99.
It's a rental unless I can download a DRM free copy.
Ten years ago, who would have thought, but I can go to Amazon to PURCHASE an mp3 of music. Download it. Play it on any of my devices.
On the post: Irony: Sony Pictures Sued For Failing To Stop Piracy
Re: Considering that this is the company that installed rootkits on CD's
Costing each victim probably at least $100 or more to have their PC repaired.
And then Sony justified it as okay with "most people don't even know what a rootkit is".
That's like saying: most people don't even know what ${X} is.
Where ${X} is one of:
* salmonella
* radiation
* (insert favorite heavy metal poison most people have never heard of)
* (insert name of little known RIAA musician)
On the post: Irony: Sony Pictures Sued For Failing To Stop Piracy
Consider if Sony were to win
And I suppose those arguments could be used even if Sony loses.
On the post: Bruce Schneier Sounds The Alarm: If You're Worried About Russians Hacking, Maybe Help Fix Voting Machine Security
Re: Electronic voting machines CAN'T be fixed
On the post: Bruce Schneier Sounds The Alarm: If You're Worried About Russians Hacking, Maybe Help Fix Voting Machine Security
It WILL NOT take the discovery of a hacked election
Or will ensure that the discoverers cannot publish.
The world wide internet will need to be shut down briefly, um . . . for maintenance. Sorry for any inconvenience.
Next >>