Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Feb 2019 @ 10:25am
Hot news isn't hot enough, but was the analysis accurate?
In the news business, when your only claim to fame is that 'we got there first' it is imperative that that news organization be mostly first. In today's nano second computer controlled trading scenario, one's 'hot news' customers need to be significantly ahead of everyone else with information or the impact is seriously decreased.
It would be interesting to see a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the two disparate analysis' compared with market reactions to the stories to see if one was more right than the other. And though the article above does not mention how far behind the Bloomberg story was vs the Capital Forums story, even an hour might have something to say about market reaction, and whether investors with access to the Capital Forums feed might have changed their minds when they got wind of the Bloomberg analysis.
In the end, being first isn't everything in financial news reporting. Being right is also a major contributor. Now, behind the smoke and mirrors, which is Capital Forums actually complaining about?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Feb 2019 @ 3:53pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ask a stupid question...
"...government did not need to prove that the defendants knew about a pending federal investigation..."
Which tells us what? The defendants were not government employees that had a responsibility to records retention laws. Law enforcement do have a responsibility to records retention laws. So do their bosses and the administrations they work for.
Those laws might differ a bit from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but the law is still the law. Oh, and local laws do not overcome state laws, and state laws do not overcome federal laws, since that is likely the next red herring you would submit, given your predilection to post irrelevant court cases.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Feb 2019 @ 2:21pm
Re: Re: 'Constitution limitations', apparently not required know
And he was practicing due diligence by not checking what those lat/long borders were. After all, he had ten minutes, and no option to spend an hour or two, or a day or two checking up on details. Right?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Feb 2019 @ 10:44am
Google may be bad, but they aren't everything
Then if the perpetrators carried Iphones and had Yahoo email accounts they will never be caught?
Too bad the police no longer have a realistic concept of investigation. Edina is a fairly well to do area in Minneapolis that I suspect would contain many security cameras. The article doesn't mention whether any other investigative techniques were used, or not, I am merely pointing out that there are other possibilities, even technological ones.
Then there is that pesky little part of the 4th Amendment:
Amendment 4 - Search and Seizure. Ratified 12/15/1791.
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Well they got the place, sort of, but the place includes hundreds if not thousands of home, cars, curtilages, apartments, businesses, etc.. They got the persons or things to be seized by requesting an 'anonymized' list of anyone that shows up as a result. But can that list be truly 'anonymized'? The argument about metadata has gone on for a while, and fairly conclusively shows that mere metadata is significantly identifying. So they are not in fact getting an 'anonymized' list, but a huge list of indirectly, yet still identifiable people. They covered their antics by asking for a step two, where certain profiles would be identified, but it seems the only person fooled by this, was the judge.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Feb 2019 @ 6:38am
But for the evidence, we are clean, clean, clean
"It's a question no cop or city legislator in Inglewood wants to answer. Thanks to their cooperative effort, the likelihood of the PD being sued over unreleased misconduct is almost nil… easy to do when there's nothing left to sue over."
Seems to me that there is plenty to sue over. What law, other than their own internal fidgeting, gave them permission to destroy public records? The records don't belong to them, they belong to the public.
Now it may be correct that the destroyed records might never be recovered (though there may be a backup of at least some of them somewhere (court cases, etc.) the fact that they were destroyed might allow someone in need of misconduct records to be allowed to presume the worst, and they should use that presumption to discredit everything any public employee from Inglewood has to say because the evidence was destroyed illegally.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Feb 2019 @ 3:42pm
They will get protection, whether they deserve it or not
Seems like this is a recommendation for ICE to undergo a tropical defrost, which would leave them underwater, or AKA sunk. To bad it won't happen as the executive is over-committed to prosecuting their agenda, rightly or wrongly.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Feb 2019 @ 3:31pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In their definition of competition they mean any method of communication. To them terrestrial broadband supplies competition, landlines provide competition, VOIP provides competition, and walkie talkies provide competition, HAM radios provide competition, hell even the post office and telegrams provide competition. So if there is only one mobile phone provider, to them, they still have competition.
And when, not if, that happens, who the hell needs bragging rights? As to how much they will charge? Well they will find out how much they can get away with before the populace determines the cost/benefit between convenience and price. The question then becomes, will they discern the difference before wireless is abandoned to the point that they cannot sustain their network, or after?
Either way, wireless is a want, not a need. I know many feel that it is a need today (pressure from companies that want 24/7 access to their employees and society in general (ooh shiny)), but the fact is, they got along without it before, and they can (and most likely will) get along without it in the future.
I get away without it now, but I no longer work and use a tablet and WiFi if I need to on the road. But I no longer need a leash, which is how I refer to cellphones. The same way I referred to that 50 mile radius pager issued to me back in the early 1980's.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Feb 2019 @ 2:52pm
Cut 'em off at the knees, or ankles or toes
It may not matter in the future as Russia is doing a practice disconnect from the Internet. Of course if they actually do this for real, they will have less ability to impact political events in other countries, so I don't think they actually will. Doing a partial shutdown where the public cannot access it but government agents can seems more likely.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Feb 2019 @ 2:27pm
Re:
Except how someone turned a Twitter account into a phone number without a court order. But then this happened in the UK and things might be different over there.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 11 Feb 2019 @ 12:15pm
Re: Re: Re:
Some say the Lion is the king of the jungle. Are you suggesting that lions aren't authoritarian? For that matter, where do you think civilization learned authoritarianism from? A natural example, possibly?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Feb 2019 @ 6:54pm
Re: Re: Re: Texas is a home defense state
There is civil court.
It is a shame that there is no one in a position to take the high ground (DoJ failures to act and current policy to not act are implicit). The only way to change this is to get the electorate to get off the 'tough on crime' agenda and warm up to the 'tough on crime, even if it's the cops' agenda. The two party system currently in place won't be amenable to that.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Feb 2019 @ 6:22pm
A fish stinks from the head first. What's at the other end?
Given the destruction of some records of misconduct, and the reticence of others to release records of misconduct, those others being at the highest levels of of the law enforcement community, how are we going to begin to rectify the issue of police misconduct?
To them, there is no misconduct. To us, their employers and the recipients of that misconduct, there is much misconduct. In between there are the courts offering qualified immunity and a presumption of 'truth telling', even when there is significant reason to disbelieve the 'truth being told'.
We need to get to a position of (I think the lawyers call it strict scrutiny, but I could be wrong) whereby everything is questioned, even police officers and drug dogs and remote drug tests, and the burden to prove still lies on the prosecution.
Then when it comes to police brought to court, since the DoJ has abrogated their responsibilities in these matters, the very least they could do is take it to a different jurisdiction, and by that I mean take is to someplace where the 'locals' are part and parcel of the orchestrated cover-up that will exonerate the cops involved (or have any propensity to be other than strictly aligned with the rule of law), who should be treated fairly, but without any other consideration.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Feb 2019 @ 5:48pm
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You forgot that he wrote a book on how to get rich, which consisted of telling others how to write a book on how to get rich, but in different words. He has now amended his business model by creating mailing lists of 1) fools that bought the book and 2) fools that downloaded the book for free (aka piracy (but doesn't preclude the Prenda enhance probability that he posted the book on the torrents so that he could collect the mailing list)...oh wait, how could he have a mailing list of people that torrented the book without going to court and getting them to force ISP's to give up that information...hmm.
There seems to be problems with not only his logic, but his process. Quelle Surprise!
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Feb 2019 @ 5:22pm
Table of Contents
1st mistake: the cops wanting a no know warrant
2nd mistake: the judge granting such a warrant
3rd mistake: the cops deciding not to wear body cams
4th mistake: the cops executing the warrant
5th mistake: the cops opening fire for ??? reason
6th mistake: the cops confiscating the neighbors video, they could have just copied it
7th mistake: Huston PD management defending their employees without fully understanding the circumstances, even worse if the did
8th mistake: Huston PD union boss trying to ameliorate the situation threatening anyone, let alone those who thing this whole shenanigan was mishandled from a professional point of view. No I am not a cop, but I am a professional, and as one professional to another, they ain't.
9th mistake: the next action anyone on the Huston Police force (management or patrol) or the union (management or member) takes.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Feb 2019 @ 5:02pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
My father (who was in the magazine business) gave me a very sagacious piece of advice about porn. He said, forget Playboy, read Cosmo, a little bit of mystery goes a long way. I was 12 or 13 at the time, at least as I remember it.
On the post: Obsolete Hot News Doctrine Back In The News As Bloomberg Is Sued For Reporting Too Quickly
Hot news isn't hot enough, but was the analysis accurate?
In the news business, when your only claim to fame is that 'we got there first' it is imperative that that news organization be mostly first. In today's nano second computer controlled trading scenario, one's 'hot news' customers need to be significantly ahead of everyone else with information or the impact is seriously decreased.
It would be interesting to see a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the two disparate analysis' compared with market reactions to the stories to see if one was more right than the other. And though the article above does not mention how far behind the Bloomberg story was vs the Capital Forums story, even an hour might have something to say about market reaction, and whether investors with access to the Capital Forums feed might have changed their minds when they got wind of the Bloomberg analysis.
In the end, being first isn't everything in financial news reporting. Being right is also a major contributor. Now, behind the smoke and mirrors, which is Capital Forums actually complaining about?
On the post: California Court Says New Records Law Covers Past Police Misconduct Records
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Ask a stupid question...
Which tells us what? The defendants were not government employees that had a responsibility to records retention laws. Law enforcement do have a responsibility to records retention laws. So do their bosses and the administrations they work for.
Those laws might differ a bit from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but the law is still the law. Oh, and local laws do not overcome state laws, and state laws do not overcome federal laws, since that is likely the next red herring you would submit, given your predilection to post irrelevant court cases.
On the post: Minnesota Judges Spent Only Minutes Approving Warrants Sweeping Up Thousands Of Cellphone Users
Re: Re: 'Constitution limitations', apparently not required know
And he was practicing due diligence by not checking what those lat/long borders were. After all, he had ten minutes, and no option to spend an hour or two, or a day or two checking up on details. Right?
On the post: Key Supporter Of FOSTA, Cindy McCain, Misidentifies 'Different Ethnicity' Child; Claims Credit For Stopping Sex Trafficking That Wasn't
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps this will help with that.
On the post: Minnesota Judges Spent Only Minutes Approving Warrants Sweeping Up Thousands Of Cellphone Users
Google may be bad, but they aren't everything
Then if the perpetrators carried Iphones and had Yahoo email accounts they will never be caught?
Too bad the police no longer have a realistic concept of investigation. Edina is a fairly well to do area in Minneapolis that I suspect would contain many security cameras. The article doesn't mention whether any other investigative techniques were used, or not, I am merely pointing out that there are other possibilities, even technological ones.
Then there is that pesky little part of the 4th Amendment:
Well they got the place, sort of, but the place includes hundreds if not thousands of home, cars, curtilages, apartments, businesses, etc.. They got the persons or things to be seized by requesting an 'anonymized' list of anyone that shows up as a result. But can that list be truly 'anonymized'? The argument about metadata has gone on for a while, and fairly conclusively shows that mere metadata is significantly identifying. So they are not in fact getting an 'anonymized' list, but a huge list of indirectly, yet still identifiable people. They covered their antics by asking for a step two, where certain profiles would be identified, but it seems the only person fooled by this, was the judge.
On the post: California Court Says New Records Law Covers Past Police Misconduct Records
But for the evidence, we are clean, clean, clean
Seems to me that there is plenty to sue over. What law, other than their own internal fidgeting, gave them permission to destroy public records? The records don't belong to them, they belong to the public.
Now it may be correct that the destroyed records might never be recovered (though there may be a backup of at least some of them somewhere (court cases, etc.) the fact that they were destroyed might allow someone in need of misconduct records to be allowed to presume the worst, and they should use that presumption to discredit everything any public employee from Inglewood has to say because the evidence was destroyed illegally.
On the post: Report Shows ICE Almost Never Punishes Contractors Housing Detainees No Matter How Many Violations They Rack Up
They will get protection, whether they deserve it or not
Seems like this is a recommendation for ICE to undergo a tropical defrost, which would leave them underwater, or AKA sunk. To bad it won't happen as the executive is over-committed to prosecuting their agenda, rightly or wrongly.
On the post: SS7 Cellular Network Flaw Nobody Wants To Fix Now Being Exploited To Drain Bank Accounts
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As a way to avoid the issue?
On the post: Sprint Sues AT&T Over Its Fake 5G, Says AT&T's Tricking Consumers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
In their definition of competition they mean any method of communication. To them terrestrial broadband supplies competition, landlines provide competition, VOIP provides competition, and walkie talkies provide competition, HAM radios provide competition, hell even the post office and telegrams provide competition. So if there is only one mobile phone provider, to them, they still have competition.
And when, not if, that happens, who the hell needs bragging rights? As to how much they will charge? Well they will find out how much they can get away with before the populace determines the cost/benefit between convenience and price. The question then becomes, will they discern the difference before wireless is abandoned to the point that they cannot sustain their network, or after?
Either way, wireless is a want, not a need. I know many feel that it is a need today (pressure from companies that want 24/7 access to their employees and society in general (ooh shiny)), but the fact is, they got along without it before, and they can (and most likely will) get along without it in the future.
I get away without it now, but I no longer work and use a tablet and WiFi if I need to on the road. But I no longer need a leash, which is how I refer to cellphones. The same way I referred to that 50 mile radius pager issued to me back in the early 1980's.
On the post: Google Caves On Russian Censorship
Cut 'em off at the knees, or ankles or toes
It may not matter in the future as Russia is doing a practice disconnect from the Internet. Of course if they actually do this for real, they will have less ability to impact political events in other countries, so I don't think they actually will. Doing a partial shutdown where the public cannot access it but government agents can seems more likely.
On the post: Sprint Sues AT&T Over Its Fake 5G, Says AT&T's Tricking Consumers
Re: Re: Re:
Wait, there's competition in wireless???? If so, then why aren't prices lower and service better?
On the post: UK Cop Calls Up 74-Year-Old Woman To Ask Her To Stop Tweeting Mean Things
Re:
Except how someone turned a Twitter account into a phone number without a court order. But then this happened in the UK and things might be different over there.
On the post: UK Cop Calls Up 74-Year-Old Woman To Ask Her To Stop Tweeting Mean Things
Re: Re: Re:
Some say the Lion is the king of the jungle. Are you suggesting that lions aren't authoritarian? For that matter, where do you think civilization learned authoritarianism from? A natural example, possibly?
On the post: After No-Knock Raid Goes Horribly Wrong, Police Union Boss Steps Up To Threaten PD's Critics
Re: Re: Re: Texas is a home defense state
There is civil court.
It is a shame that there is no one in a position to take the high ground (DoJ failures to act and current policy to not act are implicit). The only way to change this is to get the electorate to get off the 'tough on crime' agenda and warm up to the 'tough on crime, even if it's the cops' agenda. The two party system currently in place won't be amenable to that.
On the post: California AG Steps Up To Help Cops Pretend New Public Records Law Doesn't Apply To Past Misconduct Docs
A fish stinks from the head first. What's at the other end?
Given the destruction of some records of misconduct, and the reticence of others to release records of misconduct, those others being at the highest levels of of the law enforcement community, how are we going to begin to rectify the issue of police misconduct?
To them, there is no misconduct. To us, their employers and the recipients of that misconduct, there is much misconduct. In between there are the courts offering qualified immunity and a presumption of 'truth telling', even when there is significant reason to disbelieve the 'truth being told'.
We need to get to a position of (I think the lawyers call it strict scrutiny, but I could be wrong) whereby everything is questioned, even police officers and drug dogs and remote drug tests, and the burden to prove still lies on the prosecution.
Then when it comes to police brought to court, since the DoJ has abrogated their responsibilities in these matters, the very least they could do is take it to a different jurisdiction, and by that I mean take is to someplace where the 'locals' are part and parcel of the orchestrated cover-up that will exonerate the cops involved (or have any propensity to be other than strictly aligned with the rule of law), who should be treated fairly, but without any other consideration.
On the post: ChooseCo Inks Lucrative Deal With Amazon, Possibly Thanks To Netflix's 'Bandersnatch'
Re: Re: Re: Re:
You forgot that he wrote a book on how to get rich, which consisted of telling others how to write a book on how to get rich, but in different words. He has now amended his business model by creating mailing lists of 1) fools that bought the book and 2) fools that downloaded the book for free (aka piracy (but doesn't preclude the Prenda enhance probability that he posted the book on the torrents so that he could collect the mailing list)...oh wait, how could he have a mailing list of people that torrented the book without going to court and getting them to force ISP's to give up that information...hmm.
There seems to be problems with not only his logic, but his process. Quelle Surprise!
On the post: After No-Knock Raid Goes Horribly Wrong, Police Union Boss Steps Up To Threaten PD's Critics
Re: Table of Contents
Damn, where's that edit button.
On the post: After No-Knock Raid Goes Horribly Wrong, Police Union Boss Steps Up To Threaten PD's Critics
Table of Contents
1st mistake: the cops wanting a no know warrant
2nd mistake: the judge granting such a warrant
3rd mistake: the cops deciding not to wear body cams
4th mistake: the cops executing the warrant
5th mistake: the cops opening fire for ??? reason
6th mistake: the cops confiscating the neighbors video, they could have just copied it
7th mistake: Huston PD management defending their employees without fully understanding the circumstances, even worse if the did
8th mistake: Huston PD union boss trying to ameliorate the situation threatening anyone, let alone those who thing this whole shenanigan was mishandled from a professional point of view. No I am not a cop, but I am a professional, and as one professional to another, they ain't.
9th mistake: the next action anyone on the Huston Police force (management or patrol) or the union (management or member) takes.
On the post: Hawaii The Latest To Push Bullshit Porn Filter Law Pushed By Sketchy Backers
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
My father (who was in the magazine business) gave me a very sagacious piece of advice about porn. He said, forget Playboy, read Cosmo, a little bit of mystery goes a long way. I was 12 or 13 at the time, at least as I remember it.
On the post: Sheriffs' Union Boss Says Officers Have No Reason To Do Their Job If They Can't Score Forfeiture Cash On The Side
Re: Fire the fuckers then...
In that scenario Is it nature, or nurture?
Next >>