The one i'd thought of was gay rights groups suing churches for much the same reason.
Or the other way around.
Or anyone from religion X suing people from religion Y or the other way around.
Also works for non-theistic ideologies, fans of sports teams players and other celebrities
Free speech means that you are free to hold any opinion and express it freely.
The problem with this law is that it is over general - and then gives exceptions - where it should be very specific such that the exceptions are not needed.
The law should require that both
1. The allegation in false.
2. There is a disparity of status, money or influence that makes it impossible for the "victim" to effectively rebut the allegation.
Hence a gay riights group wouldn't be able to sue a church because of it's general stance on the issue but an individual who had been singled out by a church for particular criticism would (unless that individual was a major politician or other public figure - who would be able to defend themself.
Most of those aren't "based" there. They're studios or offshoots.
Rubbish.
They may have been taken over by the big players with oversees head offices - but the studios all started as independents in the UK. EG Core (Tomb Raider) Rare, Bulfrog, LionHead etc etc.
If they got shut down then the founders would just start up here as independents again. (As Peter Molyneux has done more than once already.)
Terrorism is what the British called our own countries actions
and they were right.
The British military having cleaned out the other european colonies from most of N America, the British simply wanted a perfectly fair contribution to the bill. The American colonists were the mot ungrateful peole on the planet. Without the preceding british military actions N America today would be like S America, a mish-mash of smaller separate states.
The police claim to have some kind of "instinct" for detecting wrongdoing/wrongdoes.
Well I have an instinct too. When I hear about police shooting someone my instinct often tells me that they have killed an innocent man for no good reason. As a Brit. I remember when Jean Charles de Menezes was shot in London - when the police line was still that they had thwarted an attack by killing a terrorist my instinct told me that it was a mistake and they had killed a random person by mistake.
If you have no hobbies or sports that involve equipment of any size that requires transport then maybe - but a lot of people do so no cars are not on the way out.
The problem is that politicians have a habit of passing laws that create criminal business opportunities .Drug laws and copyright are the most obvious current ones - although the stand out example from the past was of course prohibition.
The reason that crime has fallen in the UK is that many criminal business opportunites that used to exist have been made unprofitable by technology. When every middle class home had a video recorder that cost about a month's (average) wages and was easily portable then industrial scale house burglary was worthwhile. (The only tiome I have been burgled was at the peak of that era).
Nowadays the most expensive portable piece of tech in the average home costs less than 2 weeks minimum wage so the business model has failed.
The vast majority of crime is (at root) economic - so crime reduction needs to be based economics rather than "morality". You are unlikely to stop people from sinning by moral exhortation - but removing the economic incentives might just work.
Andy Archibald, who somehow is the deputy director of the National Cyber Crime Unit at the National Crime Agency, is going around spouting nonsense about how file sharing is some sort of "gateway" into more crimes for young people today :
Andy Archibald, who as the deputy director of the National Cyber Crime Unit at the National Crime Agency is busy trying to puff his own unit's importance in the regular round of trying to get more funding.
In other news it was recently revealed that the Pope is (apparently) a Roman Catholic....
but hey, if you think it is constitution to take guns away from criminals that have served their time then you don't have a right to complain if the rest of your rights are removed either.
Best proof ever that the 2nd amendment was a mistake. Basically - because it is unsustainable* - it opens the door to the removal of all the other rights.
* and it IS unsustainable. When it was written the types of arms that were available were far less lethal than what we have now.
Thus there is an inevitable restriction on the 2nd amendment. No one in their right mind would suggest that private individuals should be allowed to have tactical nuclear weapons - yet the 2nd amendment - taken at face value - would allow that and there are plenty of wealthy people who could afford it. Thus the second amendment has not been taken at face value of many years and consequently the door is open to trashing all the other constitutional rights as well.
If it was a corporate invention, the internet would be a proprietary, locked down walled garden mess that would have led to exactly none of the innovation we've seen over the last 30 years.
Correction - it would have been a bunch of competing, incompatible walled gardens.
Sadly we see this happening in the mobile device space - with Apple, Google and Microsoft all trying to own it.
So the solution is for there to be lots of video sites - each too small to be a big target - but big enough to work as a platform - the market will make this happen over time.
It is hard for westerners subject to multiple competing ideological frameworks while at the same time protected by rule if law in a high trust culture where people largely tell the truth, to imagine how primitive,superstitious,pseudoscientific, paranoid, conspiratorial, the Russian mind is.
Hmm when I talk to some of my Russian friends - University lecturers in Mathematics and Physics I don't recognise your stereotype.
If you said that about the Jews you'd be rightly called anti-semitic. If you siad it about people of African origin you'd e called a racist.
What makes you think it is OK to say it about Russians?
Wall-to-wall fallacies of relevance in these comments. If you think that these are fallacies of relevance then you don't understand fallacies of relevance.
and I am puzzled by the thought that it is possible to discuss the one without referring to the other.
It would be a strange commentary on a sports match that talked about the tactics of one team without ever referring to the tactics of their opposition.
So precisely what is the point in declaring that "hey guys, the U.S. also does really awful things and lies a lot"
Because US behaviour creates the environment in which other countries such as Russia operate. Also, possibly because many believe that the US has been much more successful than Russia in getting its lies to stick.
You made the point very well that the Russian government has made a huge effort - but done it so badly that few believe what they say - even when it is true!
The US propaganda is in many ways more interesting because it has been subtler and hence vastly more effective.
It follows that those of us "in the middle" who distrust both are more concerned to correct the US lies because no-one believes the Russian ones anyway!
On the post: Montana Prosecutors Push For Idea That State's Criminal Defamation Statute Outlaws Disparaging Religious Groups
Re: Re:
Or the other way around.
Or anyone from religion X suing people from religion Y or the other way around.
Also works for non-theistic ideologies, fans of sports teams players and other celebrities
Free speech means that you are free to hold any opinion and express it freely.
The problem with this law is that it is over general - and then gives exceptions - where it should be very specific such that the exceptions are not needed.
The law should require that both
1. The allegation in false.
2. There is a disparity of status, money or influence that makes it impossible for the "victim" to effectively rebut the allegation.
Hence a gay riights group wouldn't be able to sue a church because of it's general stance on the issue but an individual who had been singled out by a church for particular criticism would (unless that individual was a major politician or other public figure - who would be able to defend themself.
On the post: Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments
Re: Re: Re:
It may seem that way to a blinkered American but it is not true.
The web came from a Brit working in CERN in Geneva and the processor in your smartphone was almost certainly designed in Cambridge UK.
The Computer as we know it invented by Babbage, Turing, Newman (Max not Johnny Von), Flowers and Kilburn. All Brits.
On the post: Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments
Re: Re: Re:
You don't know how the industry works do you - the studios mostly create their own api infrastructure.
On the post: Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments
Cameron
It's an ill wind...
On the post: Huge Loss For Free Speech In Europe: Human Rights Court Says Sites Liable For User Comments
Re: Re: Re:
Rubbish.
They may have been taken over by the big players with oversees head offices - but the studios all started as independents in the UK. EG Core (Tomb Raider) Rare, Bulfrog, LionHead etc etc.
If they got shut down then the founders would just start up here as independents again. (As Peter Molyneux has done more than once already.)
On the post: Virginia Teenager Charged With Providing 'Material Support' For ISIS Through Tweets, Blog Posts About Privacy And Bitcoin
Re: Re: Re: Quandary
Add the EU and it is pretty much true over most of the last 40 years ntil the relatively recent (though dramatic) rise of China.
On the post: Virginia Teenager Charged With Providing 'Material Support' For ISIS Through Tweets, Blog Posts About Privacy And Bitcoin
Re: The Witch Trials of Our Age
and they were right.
The British military having cleaned out the other european colonies from most of N America, the British simply wanted a perfectly fair contribution to the bill. The American colonists were the mot ungrateful peole on the planet. Without the preceding british military actions N America today would be like S America, a mish-mash of smaller separate states.
On the post: Every Kill A 'Good' Kill: How Police And The Media Cooperate To Disparage The Dead
Instinct
Well I have an instinct too. When I hear about police shooting someone my instinct often tells me that they have killed an innocent man for no good reason. As a Brit. I remember when Jean Charles de Menezes was shot in London - when the police line was still that they had thwarted an attack by killing a terrorist my instinct told me that it was a mistake and they had killed a random person by mistake.
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 28: Is Car Ownership On The Way Out?
Hobbies
On the post: Torrent Madness: UK Cybercrime Official Argues That File Sharing Is A Gateway Drug To Crime
Re:
Too late - it seems that the British military is already a bit further down that road:
On the post: Torrent Madness: UK Cybercrime Official Argues That File Sharing Is A Gateway Drug To Crime
Re: Re:
The reason that crime has fallen in the UK is that many criminal business opportunites that used to exist have been made unprofitable by technology. When every middle class home had a video recorder that cost about a month's (average) wages and was easily portable then industrial scale house burglary was worthwhile. (The only tiome I have been burgled was at the peak of that era).
Nowadays the most expensive portable piece of tech in the average home costs less than 2 weeks minimum wage so the business model has failed.
The vast majority of crime is (at root) economic - so crime reduction needs to be based economics rather than "morality".
You are unlikely to stop people from sinning by moral exhortation - but removing the economic incentives might just work.
On the post: Torrent Madness: UK Cybercrime Official Argues That File Sharing Is A Gateway Drug To Crime
Andy Archibald
Andy Archibald, who as the deputy director of the National Cyber Crime Unit at the National Crime Agency is busy trying to puff his own unit's importance in the regular round of trying to get more funding.
In other news it was recently revealed that the Pope is (apparently) a Roman Catholic....
On the post: According To The Government, Clearing Your Browser History Is A Felony
Re: Re: Re: Re: What happen when?
Best proof ever that the 2nd amendment was a mistake.
Basically - because it is unsustainable* - it opens the door to the removal of all the other rights.
* and it IS unsustainable. When it was written the types of arms that were available were far less lethal than what we have now.
Thus there is an inevitable restriction on the 2nd amendment. No one in their right mind would suggest that private individuals should be allowed to have tactical nuclear weapons - yet the 2nd amendment - taken at face value - would allow that and there are plenty of wealthy people who could afford it. Thus the second amendment has not been taken at face value of many years and consequently the door is open to trashing all the other constitutional rights as well.
On the post: YouTube Silences Six Hours Of DARPA Robotics Finals... Because Of One Song Briefly In The Background
Re: Re: "DARPA, the wonderful government agency"
Correction - it would have been a bunch of competing, incompatible walled gardens.
Sadly we see this happening in the mobile device space - with Apple, Google and Microsoft all trying to own it.
On the post: YouTube Silences Six Hours Of DARPA Robotics Finals... Because Of One Song Briefly In The Background
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re:
Hmm when I talk to some of my Russian friends - University lecturers in Mathematics and Physics I don't recognise your stereotype.
If you said that about the Jews you'd be rightly called anti-semitic. If you siad it about people of African origin you'd e called a racist.
What makes you think it is OK to say it about Russians?
On the post: Putin Has Shifted His Internet Propaganda Army Into Overdrive
Re:
If you think that these are fallacies of relevance then you don't understand fallacies of relevance.
On the post: Putin Has Shifted His Internet Propaganda Army Into Overdrive
Snowden
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It would be a strange commentary on a sports match that talked about the tactics of one team without ever referring to the tactics of their opposition.
On the post: Putin's Internet Propaganda War Is Much Bigger And Weirder Than You Think, Now Extending Into The States
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Because US behaviour creates the environment in which other countries such as Russia operate. Also, possibly because many believe that the US has been much more successful than Russia in getting its lies to stick.
You made the point very well that the Russian government has made a huge effort - but done it so badly that few believe what they say - even when it is true!
The US propaganda is in many ways more interesting because it has been subtler and hence vastly more effective.
It follows that those of us "in the middle" who distrust both are more concerned to correct the US lies because no-one believes the Russian ones anyway!
Next >>