Apple has long been (since at least the introduction of the original Mac) an awful, abusive company. Not really much different from Microsoft in terms of corporate behavior.
"I don't think it would be shocking to see agreement on a more global sales tax rate for all online sales distributed to the state where the product is delivered."
Oh, god, I hope not. Thankfully, I live in a state that has no sales tax. I would be extremely angry if the feds imposed one and ruined my little utopia.
Actually getting sued, regardless of how legally defensible your position is, isn't just unFun. It's actively damaging to you.
That's why certain people and companies sue at the slightest cause: they have a good shot of winning by default because the defendent can't actually afford to fo to court, and even if they lose they have still managed to cause some harm to the defendent. The smaller the defendent, the more harm was caused.
"I know I would want the cops to shoot the guy holding me hostage at the first opportunity"
If the cops had perfect knowledge, then I would agree. But in the real world, I would want the cops to be sure they are targeting the right person before shooting, which means doing a bit of investigation first.
I was making a bit of a joke to highlight a particular point. IP addresses are more useful because they are relatively reliable -- it is relatively difficult for you to use a different IP address.
MAC addresses are less useful (and, in a sense more unique) because it is trivially easy to change them to something else. My portable devices really do get randomized MAC addresses that change every day. So, MAC addresses are so unique that my devices don't even keep the same one for very long.
There is no ethical difference between the two. A link is just a pointer to a parcel of data somewhere else. There is no more of a moral or ethical issue to linking to anything anywhere than there is to pointing to a physical place and saying "it's over there".
From the point of view of a site operator, there are simple mechanisms that prevent the sort of deep linking that you're talking about (inline images, etc.) If this is a big deal for a site, they can stop it easily already with existing tools. I do exactly this on my own websites to prevent anyone from inlining images, so that I'm not paying for bandwidth that is really being used by a different site.
People at his wealth level don't worry about money in the same way normal people do, but they absolutely worry about money and seek to increase their pile. The difference is that you and I worry about money because we worry about affording the stuff we want. The ultra wealthy worry about money because money is power, and they want to maximize their power. Also at a certain point, the amount of accumulated wealth becomes like a score in a game of "collect it all".
"training 911 operators to actually get a call back number"
As another commenter said, this could be a very bad thing to do. However, I wanted to note that 911 operators do have the phone number of who calls them, and in certain circumstances they will call you back. For example, if you call 911 and hang up on them, they'll call you back.
"I just think that, in plenty of other contexts, this kind "feel free to use our stuff, and in exchange we'll help you do more and make some money" should be seen as a good thing."
I think that is a good thing, but from reading and watching what the Fine Brothers have been saying about it, I have the distinct impression that this point is the least interesting to them. More interesting to them is to have some sort fo club they can beat everyone else with.
I may be entirely wrong about this, but that is entirely how they come off when they speak.
"Agree that was stupid and wrong. But separate from their offer to help others do videos."
I don't think you can seperate the two that much. I know very little about the history of these guys, but it looks like they've engaged in a lot of stupid activities both before and after this announcement.
This tells me that there is a very high likelihood that they will continue to engage in stupid activities into the future, only now they're offering a way to get on their "we won't mess with you" list.
When a person drives a car on a highway, he or she agrees to display a license plate.
This is an analogy he should avoid. In the first place, nobody "agrees" to display a license plate. They are required to. That's an enormous difference.
Regardless of that, though, with the increased public awareness of ALPRs, license plates are becoming something that more and more ordinary people are resenting.
Ah, you are correct. I was going by old studies. There have since been studies that indicate that passengers aren't as distracting. So, at the very least, this is not a settled issue.
On the post: Apple Rejects Game Based On Bible Story Due To Content Including Violence Against Children
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Google Partially Caves To French Demands For More Global Censorship Of 'Forgotten' Links
Re: Why are they even bothing Google with this?
On the post: If The CIA Apologizes For Lying About Torture, But Doesn't Tell Anyone About The Apology, Does It Really Count?
Re: Drone On
I think we have plenty of evils that we need to apologize for, but apologies mean nothing if you don't stop whatever you're apologizing for first.
On the post: Our Response To Yet Another Bogus Legal Threat From Australia: Go Learn Some Law
Re: Re: Re: Re: Trkulja v Gibsons Solicitors
On the post: Congress Passes Permanent Internet Access Tax Ban... But May Enable More e-Commerce Sales Tax
Re:
Oh, god, I hope not. Thankfully, I live in a state that has no sales tax. I would be extremely angry if the feds imposed one and ruined my little utopia.
On the post: Our Response To Yet Another Bogus Legal Threat From Australia: Go Learn Some Law
Re: Re: Re: Popcorn [was Re: ]
That's why certain people and companies sue at the slightest cause: they have a good shot of winning by default because the defendent can't actually afford to fo to court, and even if they lose they have still managed to cause some harm to the defendent. The smaller the defendent, the more harm was caused.
On the post: UK Court Tells Online Mapping Company It's Not Illegal For Google To Also Offer Online Maps
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re:
What's wrong with "we'll send a car immediately to check it out?"
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re: Re: Re: That's not a root cause.
If the cops had perfect knowledge, then I would agree. But in the real world, I would want the cops to be sure they are targeting the right person before shooting, which means doing a bit of investigation first.
On the post: DHS Official Thinks People Should Have To Give Up Their Anonymity To Use The Internet
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: It's Only a Matter of Time
MAC addresses are less useful (and, in a sense more unique) because it is trivially easy to change them to something else. My portable devices really do get randomized MAC addresses that change every day. So, MAC addresses are so unique that my devices don't even keep the same one for very long.
On the post: French Politicians Pushing To Ban Linking To Any Website Without Permission
Re: Not all linking is equal
OK.
There is no ethical difference between the two. A link is just a pointer to a parcel of data somewhere else. There is no more of a moral or ethical issue to linking to anything anywhere than there is to pointing to a physical place and saying "it's over there".
From the point of view of a site operator, there are simple mechanisms that prevent the sort of deep linking that you're talking about (inline images, etc.) If this is a big deal for a site, they can stop it easily already with existing tools. I do exactly this on my own websites to prevent anyone from inlining images, so that I'm not paying for bandwidth that is really being used by a different site.
On the post: The Fine Bros Plan Is Actually Pretty Cool If You Get Past How They Announced It
Re: Maybe someone can do this...
On the post: India Set To Ban Zero Rating As Facebook's Misleading Lobbying Falls Flat
Re: Re: impotent rage
People at his wealth level don't worry about money in the same way normal people do, but they absolutely worry about money and seek to increase their pile. The difference is that you and I worry about money because we worry about affording the stuff we want. The ultra wealthy worry about money because money is power, and they want to maximize their power. Also at a certain point, the amount of accumulated wealth becomes like a score in a game of "collect it all".
On the post: Congressional Rep Who Introduced Anti-Swatting Bill... Victim Of Attempted Swatting
Re: Maybe a call back might help?
As another commenter said, this could be a very bad thing to do. However, I wanted to note that 911 operators do have the phone number of who calls them, and in certain circumstances they will call you back. For example, if you call 911 and hang up on them, they'll call you back.
On the post: DHS Official Thinks People Should Have To Give Up Their Anonymity To Use The Internet
Re: Re: Re: It's Only a Matter of Time
Indeed. The MAC addresses on my mobile devices are so unique that they change every day.
On the post: French Politicians Pushing To Ban Linking To Any Website Without Permission
Re: Re: Nuke 'em
On the post: The Fine Bros Plan Is Actually Pretty Cool If You Get Past How They Announced It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think that is a good thing, but from reading and watching what the Fine Brothers have been saying about it, I have the distinct impression that this point is the least interesting to them. More interesting to them is to have some sort fo club they can beat everyone else with.
I may be entirely wrong about this, but that is entirely how they come off when they speak.
On the post: The Fine Bros Plan Is Actually Pretty Cool If You Get Past How They Announced It
Re: Re:
I don't think you can seperate the two that much. I know very little about the history of these guys, but it looks like they've engaged in a lot of stupid activities both before and after this announcement.
This tells me that there is a very high likelihood that they will continue to engage in stupid activities into the future, only now they're offering a way to get on their "we won't mess with you" list.
It smells a bit like a protection racket.
On the post: DHS Official Thinks People Should Have To Give Up Their Anonymity To Use The Internet
Barnett should avoid that analogy
This is an analogy he should avoid. In the first place, nobody "agrees" to display a license plate. They are required to. That's an enormous difference.
Regardless of that, though, with the increased public awareness of ALPRs, license plates are becoming something that more and more ordinary people are resenting.
On the post: Legislator Thinks Warrantless Cell Phone Searches The Best Way To Combat Distracted Driving
Re: Re: Re:
Next >>