I don't know how any court can possibly consider EULAs valid, as that is literally exactly what the First Sale Doctrine prohibits. The case that established it was about a publisher putting a EULA (not called that back then, but easily recognizable as such today) inside the cover of books they sold restricting what buyers could do with it, and the court said, no, you can't do that.
First off, what happened in Ferguson was hardly "a few rioters." But either way, that's irrelevant, because what is actually being discussed is not the rioting, but the marketing.
As the article reports, they pitched their software as a way to keep ahead of rioters. (This is even cited as a direct quote, not a paraphrase.) Tim distorts this into "its sales team highlighted its usefulness in monitoring protestors and other First Amendment activity."
Since when are riots First Amendment-protected activity?
Records obtained by the ACLU show the private company pitched its "firehose" connection to Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram as a way to monitor the situation in Ferguson (during the 2014 protests) and "stay one step ahead of the rioters."
Geofeedia itself didn't do anything illegal. It simply provided a one-stop shop for social media monitoring of public posts. It's the way it was pitched that was a problem. Rather than sell it as a way to keep law enforcement informed of criminal activity, its sales team highlighted its usefulness in monitoring protestors and other First Amendment activity.
Since when are riots First Amendment-protected activity?
Just off the top of my head... how about the automotive industry?
Time and time again, setting higher standards for safety, for fuel efficiency, and for low emissions has spurred innovation in developing ways to safer, more efficient, less polluting cars less expensive and more available to the mass market.
Really? Coulda fooled me; virtually every single article on here is about laws, politics, and public policy in one way or another, presented in such a way as to attempt to persuade readers to hold specific, well-defined opinions on various politically relevant topics.
1) We paid for it. 2) We're not getting it. 3) They're actively enforcing us not getting it, despite the fact that we paid for it. 4) It's critical infrastructure, as necessary to the smooth functioning of our modern society as roads or power lines.
Considering that Verizon has apparently settled on an official policy of fraud, (that's what it's called when you get someone to pay for something and then don't give it to them,) and considering that Verizon's apathy is specifically the result of maintaining this critical infrastructure being unprofitable, are there any good reasons why it shouldn't be nationalized at this point and run by a public agency?
You're parsing incorrectly. "All manner of" is an older term for "all sorts of", and Stuxnet was the specific example given for US hacking indiscriminately causing all manner of harm.
One, the United States effectively wrote the book on hacking other countries causing all manner of harm (hello, Stuxnet),
What kind of "all manner of harm" did Stuxnet cause? AFAIK it harmed exactly what it was meant to harm (centrifuges designed to produce fuel for illegal nuclear weapons) with no collateral damage to unrelated systems.
Oh, these guys aren't even the worst of it, even in the opioid addiction realm.
Suboxone is one way to treat opioid addiction, but a more common treatment is Methadone. The primary producer and vendor of Methadone is Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. Among Mallinckrodt's portfolio is a handful of opioid pain pills, including Roxicodone™, made from the same active ingredient as the notoriously addictive OxyContin.
In other words, they're actively profiting off both sides of the addiction equation.
Yeah, this is what I've been saying for a long time now. We need a law to address this specifically.
Since laws all seem to need a catchy title, call this one "The Crime Does Not Pay Act:" Any business found guilty of violating the law in a way that increases revenue must face a mandatory minimum fine of 100% of the gross revenue received through their illegal dealings.
I understand Rabbi Sacks' dual concerns about the growing use of technology threatening both our jobs and our connections with one other.
I don't. Admittedly, as a computer programmer I may have a bit of a skewed perspective on the first "threat," but the second one is just plain wrong. I use modern technology on a daily basis to keep in touch with friends and colleagues in locale as far-flung as Boston, California, Pakistan, France and Australia. When my brother was living in Russia for a time, I was able to use Skype to have real-time, face-to-face conversations with him. In any earlier age, the rabbi's counterparts would have considered that a miracle. Now that we have it as a reliable part of everyday life, what possible reason could he have to call it a threat?
"Dahir Adan's iPhone is locked and we are in the process of assessing our legal and technical options to gain access to this device and the data it may contain," Thornton said.
Because that evidence is so sorely needed in order to secure a conviction...
Make it a mandatory requirement for everyone to vote. That ensures high voter turnout, eliminating a common criticism.
Argentina already has this. Aside from a few very narrow exceptions, all citizens of voting age are required to vote. However, it is legal to votar en blanco (cast a blank ballot,) which is regarded as a protest vote.
But like almost everything else law enforcement forensic experts claim are reasonably certain, scientifically-speaking, examination of prints no more guarantees a match than examining bite marks.
A few months ago I had to be fingerprinted as part of obtaining clearance for work. I went to a place that performed fingerprinting, which they did by pressing my fingers up against the glass surface of some sort of scanning machine, which fed the results into a computer.
They were supposed to run each finger twice to make sure they matched. The guy running it had to do each finger multiple times because he couldn't get matches, and several times he just overrode the requirement to get a second print after multiple failures.
This makes me think maybe I ought to go commit a crime, because my prints don't match themselves! :P
We've been discussing for a while now about how the MPAA, with the help of the Copyright Office, has been propping up the complete myth that the FCC's plan to create more competition in the cable set top box space involves violating the copyrights of studios. It's a complete myth.
Meh. Only if you think, like some sort of ridiculously antiquated reasonable person that copyright is a right to control copying. Wherever would you get such a silly, outmoded idea? Ever since the DMCA passed and gave us legal protection for DRM, we have been able to achieve it's true goal: a right to control usage! And as such, this plan clearly violates our copyright! - the MAFIAA
On the post: Come On Elon! Tesla Stupidly Bans Owners From Using Self-Driving Teslas For Uber
Re: Post-sale conditions
I don't know how any court can possibly consider EULAs valid, as that is literally exactly what the First Sale Doctrine prohibits. The case that established it was about a publisher putting a EULA (not called that back then, but easily recognizable as such today) inside the cover of books they sold restricting what buyers could do with it, and the court said, no, you can't do that.
On the post: ACLU Dumps Docs On Social Media Monitoring Firm Geofeedia; Social Media Platforms Respond By Dumping Geofeedia
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There is nothing "well regulated" about a riot, pretty much by definition.
On the post: ACLU Dumps Docs On Social Media Monitoring Firm Geofeedia; Social Media Platforms Respond By Dumping Geofeedia
Re: Re:
As the article reports, they pitched their software as a way to keep ahead of rioters. (This is even cited as a direct quote, not a paraphrase.) Tim distorts this into "its sales team highlighted its usefulness in monitoring protestors and other First Amendment activity."
Since when are riots First Amendment-protected activity?
On the post: ACLU Dumps Docs On Social Media Monitoring Firm Geofeedia; Social Media Platforms Respond By Dumping Geofeedia
Since when are riots First Amendment-protected activity?
On the post: The New Federal Safety Guidelines For Self-Driving Cars Are Too Vague... And States Are Already Making Them Mandatory
Re: Regulations
Time and time again, setting higher standards for safety, for fuel efficiency, and for low emissions has spurred innovation in developing ways to safer, more efficient, less polluting cars less expensive and more available to the mass market.
On the post: As Donald Trump Ramps Up Threats To Sue Newspapers, A Reminder Of Why We Need Free Speech Protections
Really? Coulda fooled me; virtually every single article on here is about laws, politics, and public policy in one way or another, presented in such a way as to attempt to persuade readers to hold specific, well-defined opinions on various politically relevant topics.
On the post: Verizon Punishes Techs That Try To Repair DSL Customers It No Longer Wants
Market failure
2) We're not getting it.
3) They're actively enforcing us not getting it, despite the fact that we paid for it.
4) It's critical infrastructure, as necessary to the smooth functioning of our modern society as roads or power lines.
Considering that Verizon has apparently settled on an official policy of fraud, (that's what it's called when you get someone to pay for something and then don't give it to them,) and considering that Verizon's apathy is specifically the result of maintaining this critical infrastructure being unprofitable, are there any good reasons why it shouldn't be nationalized at this point and run by a public agency?
On the post: Obama Promises 'Proportional' Response To Russian Hacking, Ignores That We Started The Fight
Re: Re:
On the post: Obama Promises 'Proportional' Response To Russian Hacking, Ignores That We Started The Fight
What kind of "all manner of harm" did Stuxnet cause? AFAIK it harmed exactly what it was meant to harm (centrifuges designed to produce fuel for illegal nuclear weapons) with no collateral damage to unrelated systems.
Is there evidence to suggest otherwise?
On the post: Antitrust Suit Alleges Pharma Company Rubbished Its Own Product In Order To Stave Off Competition From Generics
Re:
Suboxone is one way to treat opioid addiction, but a more common treatment is Methadone. The primary producer and vendor of Methadone is Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals. Among Mallinckrodt's portfolio is a handful of opioid pain pills, including Roxicodone™, made from the same active ingredient as the notoriously addictive OxyContin.
In other words, they're actively profiting off both sides of the addiction equation.
On the post: FCC: Comcast Routinely Charges Customers For Hardware, Services Never Ordered
Re: Hit hard or don't bother
Since laws all seem to need a catchy title, call this one "The Crime Does Not Pay Act:" Any business found guilty of violating the law in a way that increases revenue must face a mandatory minimum fine of 100% of the gross revenue received through their illegal dealings.
On the post: Technology Brings Peace, Not Peril
I don't. Admittedly, as a computer programmer I may have a bit of a skewed perspective on the first "threat," but the second one is just plain wrong. I use modern technology on a daily basis to keep in touch with friends and colleagues in locale as far-flung as Boston, California, Pakistan, France and Australia. When my brother was living in Russia for a time, I was able to use Skype to have real-time, face-to-face conversations with him. In any earlier age, the rabbi's counterparts would have considered that a miracle. Now that we have it as a reliable part of everyday life, what possible reason could he have to call it a threat?
On the post: FBI Tests The Waters On Another Attempt To Force Apple To Unlock An iPhone
Re: Re: The FBI isn't this stupid
It's an easy mistake to make around here sometimes, but double-check the author next time. Tim Cushing did not write this one.
On the post: FBI Tests The Waters On Another Attempt To Force Apple To Unlock An iPhone
Because that evidence is so sorely needed in order to secure a conviction...
On the post: Argentina Not Only Wants To Bring In E-Voting, It Will Make It Illegal To Check The System For Electoral Fraud
Re:
On the post: Argentina Not Only Wants To Bring In E-Voting, It Will Make It Illegal To Check The System For Electoral Fraud
Re: Wouldn't it be simpler . . .
Argentina already has this. Aside from a few very narrow exceptions, all citizens of voting age are required to vote. However, it is legal to votar en blanco (cast a blank ballot,) which is regarded as a protest vote.
On the post: AT&T Stops Charging Broadband Users Extra For Privacy
they can't choose not to have Facebook build a shadow profile on them.
On the post: We QA Tested Vote2016() Against Last Night's Debate; No Code Changes Required
evil2: People who make trouble for the Clintons have a long history of turning up dead under mysterious circumstances.
On the post: DOJ Tells Forensic Experts To Stop Overstating The 'Scientific Certainty' Of Presented Evidence
A few months ago I had to be fingerprinted as part of obtaining clearance for work. I went to a place that performed fingerprinting, which they did by pressing my fingers up against the glass surface of some sort of scanning machine, which fed the results into a computer.
They were supposed to run each finger twice to make sure they matched. The guy running it had to do each finger multiple times because he couldn't get matches, and several times he just overrode the requirement to get a second print after multiple failures.
This makes me think maybe I ought to go commit a crime, because my prints don't match themselves! :P
On the post: Law Professor Mark Lemley: Hollywood Is Simply Wrong About FCC's Set Top Box Plan
Meh. Only if you think, like some sort of ridiculously antiquated reasonable person that copyright is a right to control copying. Wherever would you get such a silly, outmoded idea? Ever since the DMCA passed and gave us legal protection for DRM, we have been able to achieve it's true goal: a right to control usage! And as such, this plan clearly violates our copyright!
- the MAFIAA
Next >>