They don't monitor every call. It's like a watch list too. The only difference is that their watch list is much much bigger and almost all foreigners are on the list.
Years ago (and that's in the late 199x and early 200x), when you visit China, you have to be very careful when you talk to people. The type of people you want to be especially careful about are taxi drivers, who during transit will chat you up. If you are a foreigner, you need to be especially careful on what you say. There are a large percent of "informants" among the taxi drivers.
In addition to this, I remember those days when you call out of China from a hotel on a land line, your call will routinely fail on the first call, and then the second call would go through. When my co-workers calls, this almost always happens. It was until one day another person from a different company with base in China told me that they are automatically/manually checking foreigners' calls.
I haven't heard anything like that for the latter part of 200x though, but from this post it still seems to be going on.
If arriving at NYT from a link doesn't count as one of your "limited" visit...
what's stopping someone setting up a pure portal page for all the NYT article? And if you want to avoid NYT catching you, you can link to all the articles in the web that links to the NYT page you want?
So in essence, did NYT just gave up all their potential traffic and revenue on their pages to 2nd/3rd party news sites/agencies?
Which kind of making me wonder that since this is such a strong "psychological factor", would an plead of "temporary insanity" because I was "psychologically pressured" to "grope" work?
I've always wondered how "temporary insanity" works, because I think most people go through that quite a few times each day. :D
I pointed this out like, 2 years ago and it's all slowly coming true. I just have a few opinions with the whole thing
1. The IEEE article seems quite fixated on win rate. Apparently the win rate is a concern. But it shouldn't be. Are we assuming that all claims are valid? Such that if you lose your case, win rate is down and that signifies a problem? The article also suggest that the new IP court is putting out more professional and consistent ruling. This tells me that the number of false claims are increasing and that's why the win rate is dropping.
2. Why are the Americans crying because they are not winning? This just tells everyone that US are not interested in fairness or IP protection. They are just interested in winning their own cases. What they really want, is a puppet IP court that rules all their cases as valid. Now that an actual court is set up which the US has no power over and (i am assuming) ruling more professional and fairly, they cry foul. Geez, the world is not as perfect as you would like to believe eh?
Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
don't forget the following parties in contributory infringement...
-USPS for mailing the CDs and memory sticks
-Transit system for letting pirates taking them to go to destination
-Telco for letting them discuss meeting details
-7-11 for supplying delicious snacks and drinks when pirates are hungry and thirsty
-Music stores for selling the "source CD" for piracy
-Parents for raising pirates (oh wait, they are already on the list)
-Backpack companies for providing bags for carrying pirating material
-Stationary makers for making envelopes
-RIAA for organizing artists in a easy to target list for pirates
.
.
.
Poor Reynolds. The morons over at ICE/HS probably say, "hey this guys is freshly out of college and young. He must know how this thing works. Let's put him on this hired job from MPAA since we ourselves has absolutely no idea what's going on."
On the other hand, any college student with some kind of technological knowledge would know a few of the basics on the Internet and file sharing. Based on how clueless this is, seems like ICE/HS is really getting the "cream" of the crop isn't it.
Or, another possibility... MPAA's clueless lawyers actually wrote this! either being clueless or intentionally misleading, and Reynolds is just signing them without checking!
I don't think any kind of campaign is going to make people interested in going to use to get groped and naked scanned.
I haven't fly to US in over 6 years and there will be no convincing me to fly to US to visit until TSA is gone. I've thought about going to Las Vega for holiday a few times in the 6 years, but they are quickly crushed by the thought of TSA.
"Of course, supporters might claim that terrorists are too scared off by the screenings, so that's why we're safe."
I present you, quotes from The Simpsons episode "Much Apu about Nothing"
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm. Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad. Homer: Thank you, dear. Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away. Homer: Oh, how does it work? Lisa: It doesn't work. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: It's just a stupid rock. Homer: Uh-huh. Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money] Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
If a country has no concept of a species of fish named "salmon", then it would be impossible for them to call it one. In many states there are many definitions and species of "fish", the same word is used to mean more than one species of "fish". So what someone in Europe may call a "fish", someone in the USA may call a "salmon", and it wouldn't change a thing.
If a country has no concept of a species of fish named "salmon", then it would be impossible for them to call it one. In many states there are many definitions and species of "salmon", the same word is used to mean more than one species of "salmon". So what someone in Europe may call a "fish", someone in the USA may call a "salmon", and it wouldn't change a thing.
"You have to read it to believe it, but it took the court 8 pages to go through this hard work, and why? Was the court offended by what it regarded to be cheating? If so, God help us if law is being reduced to such subjective, non-statutory grounds."
It just means the court has a WoW account and he's had enough with the cheaters using WoWGlider to beat him in everything.
On the post: China Will Cut Off Your Phone Call If You Say The Word 'Protest' [Updated]
Re: Self-censorship
Years ago (and that's in the late 199x and early 200x), when you visit China, you have to be very careful when you talk to people. The type of people you want to be especially careful about are taxi drivers, who during transit will chat you up. If you are a foreigner, you need to be especially careful on what you say. There are a large percent of "informants" among the taxi drivers.
In addition to this, I remember those days when you call out of China from a hotel on a land line, your call will routinely fail on the first call, and then the second call would go through. When my co-workers calls, this almost always happens. It was until one day another person from a different company with base in China told me that they are automatically/manually checking foreigners' calls.
I haven't heard anything like that for the latter part of 200x though, but from this post it still seems to be going on.
On the post: NYTimes Columnists Telling Readers How To Get Around The Paywall
If arriving at NYT from a link doesn't count as one of your "limited" visit...
what's stopping someone setting up a pure portal page for all the NYT article? And if you want to avoid NYT catching you, you can link to all the articles in the web that links to the NYT page you want?
So in essence, did NYT just gave up all their potential traffic and revenue on their pages to 2nd/3rd party news sites/agencies?
On the post: An Open Letter From A Canadian To The New York Times, Eh?
On the post: Another Attempt To Make TSA Searches Open To Sex Offender Charges
Re: Re: I'm good with it
I've always wondered how "temporary insanity" works, because I think most people go through that quite a few times each day. :D
On the post: Be Careful What You Wish For: Taiwan Using US Pressured Patent Laws Against US Companies
1. The IEEE article seems quite fixated on win rate. Apparently the win rate is a concern. But it shouldn't be. Are we assuming that all claims are valid? Such that if you lose your case, win rate is down and that signifies a problem? The article also suggest that the new IP court is putting out more professional and consistent ruling. This tells me that the number of false claims are increasing and that's why the win rate is dropping.
2. Why are the Americans crying because they are not winning? This just tells everyone that US are not interested in fairness or IP protection. They are just interested in winning their own cases. What they really want, is a puppet IP court that rules all their cases as valid. Now that an actual court is set up which the US has no power over and (i am assuming) ruling more professional and fairly, they cry foul. Geez, the world is not as perfect as you would like to believe eh?
On the post: RIAA Threatening ICANN About .music; Claiming It Will Be Used To Infringe
Now that's negativity.
On the post: RIAA Threatening ICANN About .music; Claiming It Will Be Used To Infringe
Re: I predict the return of the old fashioned sneakernet.
-USPS for mailing the CDs and memory sticks
-Transit system for letting pirates taking them to go to destination
-Telco for letting them discuss meeting details
-7-11 for supplying delicious snacks and drinks when pirates are hungry and thirsty
-Music stores for selling the "source CD" for piracy
-Parents for raising pirates (oh wait, they are already on the list)
-Backpack companies for providing bags for carrying pirating material
-Stationary makers for making envelopes
-RIAA for organizing artists in a easy to target list for pirates
.
.
.
Oh hell, just sue them all.
On the post: The Companies Who Support Censoring The Internet
Congratulations on making my blacklist!
On the post: Monster Cable Issues Yet Another Bogus DMCA Notice To A Search Engine
Oh well...
On the post: Homeland Security Presents 'Evidence' For Domain Seizures; Proves It Knows Little About The Internet - Or The Law
On the other hand, any college student with some kind of technological knowledge would know a few of the basics on the Internet and file sharing. Based on how clueless this is, seems like ICE/HS is really getting the "cream" of the crop isn't it.
Or, another possibility... MPAA's clueless lawyers actually wrote this! either being clueless or intentionally misleading, and Reynolds is just signing them without checking!
man that last possibility is scary...
On the post: US Response To Massive Decline In Foreign Travelers: Keep Crazy Policies, But Set Up Ad Campaign
I haven't fly to US in over 6 years and there will be no convincing me to fly to US to visit until TSA is gone. I've thought about going to Las Vega for holiday a few times in the 6 years, but they are quickly crushed by the thought of TSA.
On the post: Whether Or Not The TSA Has Ever Caught A Terrorist Is Apparently A State Secret
"Of course, supporters might claim that terrorists are too scared off by the screenings, so that's why we're safe."
I present you, quotes from The Simpsons episode "Much Apu about Nothing"
Homer: Not a bear in sight. The Bear Patrol must be working like a charm.
Lisa: That's spacious reasoning, Dad.
Homer: Thank you, dear.
Lisa: By your logic I could claim that this rock keeps tigers away.
Homer: Oh, how does it work?
Lisa: It doesn't work.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: It's just a stupid rock.
Homer: Uh-huh.
Lisa: But I don't see any tigers around, do you?
[Homer thinks of this, then pulls out some money]
Homer: Lisa, I want to buy your rock.
On the post: As US Insists ACTA Is Not A Treaty, EU Trade Commissioner Admits It's A Treaty
Re:
If a country has no concept of a species of fish named "salmon", then it would be impossible for them to call it one. In many states there are many definitions and species of "fish", the same word is used to mean more than one species of "fish". So what someone in Europe may call a "fish", someone in the USA may call a "salmon", and it wouldn't change a thing.
There.
On the post: As US Insists ACTA Is Not A Treaty, EU Trade Commissioner Admits It's A Treaty
Re:
There.
On the post: Court Rejects Probation Rules On Teen That Ban Him From Using Social Networks Or Instant Messaging Programs
is that a spelling mistake?
On the post: Blizzard Sues Starcraft II Cheat Creators Under Dubious Copyright Theory
Re:
If a bot can play your game, does that make you/players mental level down to a bot?
On the post: Blizzard Sues Starcraft II Cheat Creators Under Dubious Copyright Theory
It just means the court has a WoW account and he's had enough with the cheaters using WoWGlider to beat him in everything.
On the post: Would US Officials Really Decide Not To Sign ACTA?
Re: Obama's conundrum
Yes we can! Yes we can! Yes we can!
Oh wait, the campaign is over... Okay, stop the propaganda and lie machine, business as usual.
Carry on, nothing to see here.
On the post: Wait, So The RIAA Is Offended That Google Won't Do Work For Free?
/sarcasm
On the post: Is It Patent Infringement To Reuse Recycled Apple Magsafe Connectors?
Why can't Apple just tell it's licensee not to sell to Sanho or else they'll retract their license.
However, I really find it hard to believe that Sanho can find a source for enough "recycled" connector to make enough product for the masses.
Next >>