You know, even though I'm Autistic, the lack of a sarc mark on that AC's comment didn't affect my ability to detect the obvious sarcasm in any way. So what's your excuse for your faulty sarcasm detector?
Personally, I would say that the parody JCP account is easy to detect as a non-governmental work on the basis that the ConDems have never been that honest about their policies!
@ Violynne, no one has a right to be heard, okay? Speak, yes, but be heard? Hell, no. Actually, I would argue that the right to be heard is inherent in the right to speak. However, that doesn't mean that others don't have the not to hear any speech they don't want to.
Yes, but the act of reporting hides the comments from others. The reporters themselves have already seen it and decided for others that the comment needs to be hidden. Yes, but the act of clicking on the post unhides it, allowing others to see it and decide for themselves whether or not it needs to be hidden. Going by what I've seen after unhiding posts here, I'm happy to trust the judgment of others.
when I sideload Android apps, I get them only from sites I trust and study the permissions on them as carefully as I study the permissions on the apps I get from Google Play.
By denying people the power to share, we are helping to oppress those who need to make their voices heard on a different scale from what has historically been possible. These voices will not be allowed to increase in number and volume. They should be ignored. FTFY, Zuckerberg.
Antitrust? Come on, Google may have forced other search engines to close with its innovations, but not all of them, and its main competitors (Bing and Yahoo!) sprang up after Google got market share. Basically, Google is big because people like its results, not through antitrust.
According to Trekkie Monster, they are. All together now: The Internet is for porn The Internet is for porn Why you think the Net was born? Porn, porn, porn!
Add to that the fact that the patent itself talks about putting podcasts on "audio cassettes and compact discs", Mike. In fact, I would argue, just from the Autistic readable parts, that this patent covers selling podcasts on tapes and CDs, not podcasting itself.
If you go to the patent page via the link provided in this article and scroll down far enough, you can read the following: More recently, �Internet radio� sources has been introduced which make files of audio program material available for downloading on the World Wide Web using conventional web browsers to locate and request specific files which are then played in real time by special programs, including the popular �Real Audio� program offered by Progressive Networks. Basically, Jim Logan stated the fact that radio stations were already podcasting in his patent application. Which idiot was examining patents at the USPTO that day, I wonder?
On the post: EA: You Can Only Rate Our Dungeon Keeper App If you Give It A Perfect Rating
Re: Re:
On the post: UK Government Official Gets Twitter Parody Account Closed Down For Mocking Politicians And Heads Of Large Companies
Easy to detect as parody
On the post: Lululemon: If You Can't Beat Your Customers, Ban Your Customers
Hey, Lululemon...
On the post: When Facebook's Terms Of Service Decide What Kind Of 'Speech' Is Okay, Activists Get Silenced
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: When Facebook's Terms Of Service Decide What Kind Of 'Speech' Is Okay, Activists Get Silenced
Re: Re:
Actually, I would argue that the right to be heard is inherent in the right to speak. However, that doesn't mean that others don't have the not to hear any speech they don't want to.
On the post: When Facebook's Terms Of Service Decide What Kind Of 'Speech' Is Okay, Activists Get Silenced
Re: Re: Re:
Yes, but the act of clicking on the post unhides it, allowing others to see it and decide for themselves whether or not it needs to be hidden. Going by what I've seen after unhiding posts here, I'm happy to trust the judgment of others.
On the post: Security Researcher Punches Holes In NBC's 'Everyone Going To Sochi Will Be Hacked" Story; NBC Doubles Down In Response
This is why...
On the post: If Harry Potter Was An Academic Work
On the post: DRM Is The Right To Make Up Your Own Copyright Laws
'Nuff said.
On the post: When Facebook's Terms Of Service Decide What Kind Of 'Speech' Is Okay, Activists Get Silenced
What Facebook was really saying...
FTFY, Zuckerberg.
On the post: Google Promises To Point To Competitor's Results To Settle Antitrust Claims In Europe
Re: Re: Da fuq?
On the post: Texas A&M Goes After Washington Brewery Over 12th Man Trademark
In other words...
On the post: Texas A&M Goes After Washington Brewery Over 12th Man Trademark
Re:
On the post: Google Promises To Point To Competitor's Results To Settle Antitrust Claims In Europe
Da fuq?
On the post: Adobe's New Subscription Service Goes Live And Is Cracked In Less Than 24 Hours
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: UK Politicians Think They Can Write Google's Search Algorithm Better Than Google
Re:
According to Trekkie Monster, they are. All together now:
The Internet is for porn
The Internet is for porn
Why you think the Net was born?
Porn, porn, porn!
On the post: Podcasting Patent Troll Files Bogus Subpoena To Intimidate Donors To EFF's 'Save Podcasting' Campaign
Re: Re:
On the post: Planet Money Takes On The Podcasting Patent Troll
This guy produced the prior art himself
Basically, Jim Logan stated the fact that radio stations were already podcasting in his patent application. Which idiot was examining patents at the USPTO that day, I wonder?
On the post: Planet Money Takes On The Podcasting Patent Troll
Re: Re:
On the post: Honesty Policy: Russia Making No Bones About Spying On Everyone During The Olympics
Re: Re:
Next >>