Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 17 Dec 2018 @ 7:16pm
Hoping against hope
Hopefully the UK gets it right as well.
Hope springs eternal. What are the odds? How many things has the UK gotten right in recent memory? I am not sure, maybe some, but the list of horrible's is fairly long.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 17 Dec 2018 @ 2:21pm
Who do they think they are?
Doesn't it seem that the first problem is associating the word intelligence with the intelligence community? Self serving blackmail collectors with a tendency to violence and really poor nation building skills (not just others, but ours as well) does appear to be a more accurate description.
And given the fact that they nominally work for us but don't view us as part of their stakeholder group is arrogant beyond means.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 17 Dec 2018 @ 7:23am
Re: I’m not surprised
Just because the IRS is used to fucking people over doesn't mean they should know how to run a brothel. One is for profit, and the other is merely for profit.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 17 Dec 2018 @ 7:01am
Re:
Just wait for the battle between entertainment industries (movies, books, music) and entertainment industries (online gaming) for total control of the Internet. Any pesky government whining about terrorism or fake news with regard to one party or another will be rolled over with bribes (err, political party contributions) in the wake of forthcoming devastation.
At which point the dark net will become the new Internet and control will be a thing of the past. And this evolution will be just a stepping stone as the dark dark net will be under development and by that time in beta testing.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 16 Dec 2018 @ 5:46pm
Get a clue
Ask Twitter, not Techdirt.
Just because you want a subject brought up doesn't mean it will be brought up on any particular platform. Twitter might be doing it for political reasons. They also might not be doing it for other particular reasons. They might be doing it for some entirely different other reasons. Those reasons might be relevant to your agenda, and those reasons might not be relevant to your particular agenda.
But assuming that this is the time or place to discuss your agenda is your error, not anyone else.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 16 Dec 2018 @ 2:39pm
Re: Is Twitter Censoring Palestinian Activists?
There are many atrocities in the world today. They happen all over, and some may be tech related and others not. Still, Techdirt gets to decide which ones to cover, and why, not you.
We may condemn the supposed atrocity you point out, as a community. There is only so much bandwidth (aka number of articles per week, so to speak) and not all atrocities might make it past their filter. And believe that it is their filter to decide what to cover what not to.
Trying to re-think Twitters actions in any given instance isn't the point of Techdirt, proven by they aren't a Twitter only condemnation blog. That holds, even if they do sometimes point out Twitter in some articles for some reasons. I think their MO (modus operandi) is to make particular points when the opportunity offers rather than just following some political agenda or other. They could choose to, but that is wholly their decision, not yours.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Dec 2018 @ 6:37pm
Multiple problems
To be fair, there are such persons known, and have ability thereto as supertasters. Since tasting is, as it were, limited to five things, sweet, alkaline, salinity, acidity, and umami, and the rest of 'taste' is actually olfactory (odor, what you smell either through the nose or through the throat to the nose) and that one cannot take place without the other. There is a possibility that Lawrence Police Officer Kimberly Nicholson is a supertaster, or more to the point, a super sniffer. And if she is, her time and talents are wasted being a cop, as supertasters are fairly rare.
But even if she is, that needs to be proved. And even if she is, her 'training and experience' needs to be quantified with how many time she 'sniffed' marijuana, and none was found verses the number of times she 'sniffed' marijuana and found some. Then to complicate matters, those times she smelled marijuana smoke and actual raw marijuana. Without admitting to anything, one is more pungent than the other, and the one less pungent is more difficult to detect.
In addition, while marijuana may or may not be legal in Kansas at the moment, there are a majority of states that have some form of marijuana legalization, many of them medical only, and others recreational, it may only be a matter of time before it becomes legalized, nationally. Then where will this 'precedent' stand?
In the meantime, should the 'defendants' have the resources, appealing this decision to higher authorities might get some of the questions above asked, and maybe a few that I, as a non-lawyer, haven't thought of.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 14 Dec 2018 @ 8:16am
Re:
A better question might be how many times will we let them fail to spend the money we give them on what they are supposed to spend it on? They've been paid, make them do the work they were paid for.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 7:14pm
Broken Inputs
I get it, It's about control. Control for economic reasons. Or is it political reasons? Or is it just about overpowering all others around your sphere?
The question is where did this idea of control come from? I don't mean simple control, but control over everything? Was it from earlier corporate entities, or from examples of government? Or just the idea of emulating previous powerful people?
Then there is the question of desire. Desire for control. Is it innate? Does it come within our genes? Is it something society instills? Is there a preternatural impulse that causes people to want control over everything related to them or their work or their personalities or their environment?
It doesn't exist in everyone. Some people have control over their control impulses and don't impugn them over everyone around them. Others, not so much.
Is it actually a disease? An aberration of personality? Something learned? Something done in imitation of adulated others? Is is something that should be desired? If so, why doesn't everyone have this impulse?
Should we, as the several societies that make up our world disdain this idea of control? If someone wants to control others then they should be, I don't know, at least remonstrated and kept from the ability to control others. Should that desire, that wanting to be in control be a warning sign of other undesirable traits?
There is a need for leaders. For someone to be the head of a company. For someone to be, at least for a time, the head of a country. But leaders with control issues are actually toxic, both to the entities they lead but to all those around them. Yet we keep putting people with control issues in positions of power. To wit, check out our current dear leader.
Part of the problem is that when choosing bosses we pick the wrong people. In some instances we pick the highest achievers, rather than the best supervisor. The best supervisor would probably make the better manager, the highest achiever is likely someone who has some portion of the control issue syndrome. We need both, but to put someone in a position of power because they are the highest achiever, rather than the better manager is a mistake we keep making. Both from a political standpoint, and a business one.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 1:12pm
FCC act? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,...
First, given the FCC's current rate of lying, either alleged or proven, is so high that it is difficult to say that whatever they say is truthful to any extent?
Second, how do they expect to close the 'digital divide' without competition, something they seem adamantly opposed to? Of course, if the competition is actually allowed, then those competitors will be absorbed forthwith, that is as soon as they spent the money to improve rural broadband.
Third, what is, or could, the FCC do about the billions of dollars already given to the Telecom's/ISP's to do rural development that they have taken as profits and done very little to nothing about rural development?
Fourth, when and/or if the FCC actually gets accurate information on Broadband Availability, just what will they do about it? They seem to have given up their ability to supervise Telecom's/ISP's in their strained effort to eliminate net neutrality.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 12:47pm
Re: Re:
And your assuming that the US Government, current or otherwise, want's the EU editing anything over here. No, they want the control, not someone else, but with the 1st Amendment they have some problems, as the courts have not totally gone under the control of the Executive.
The bigger question is one of sovereignty, as Mason points out. How the hell does the EU expect to enforce their wet dream ejaculations anywhere other than in the EU? Sure there could be some economic sanctions, maybe something else. But actual enforcement?
OK, we have some examples of the US doing similar things (Kim Dotcom, whether you like him or not, US jurisdiction?) and others. But they haven't won in the case of Dotcom, and it's been what, 7 years?
This whole extraterritorial enforcement of local laws has got to stop.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 12:38pm
Re:
The nature of your statement makes a whole lot of assumptions. The first of which is that whatever you're talking about was taken down for political, rather than other, reasons. Secondly, that whomever took down whatever, had some political agenda, which could go either way, right? And third, that whomever did the taking down has a political agenda contrary to whatever was taken down, which might not actually be the case as there could be other reasons for the take down.
Got any citations with some verifiable fact based backup that the take downs you refer to are in fact political in nature, and not something else?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 10:42am
r way it fails
"Only social media companies with at least 75 million subscribers would be subject to Rye's bill."
"The owner or operator of a social media website who resides in this state is subject to a private right of action by a social media website user if the social media website purposely:..."
I wonder how many social media companies with at least 75 million subscribers reside in the state of Arkansas?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 7:22am
Companies have free speech rights that override...
...Citizens free speech rights?
I am not so sure that Brett Kavanaugh's ascension to the Supreme Court is as much a benefit to the concept as those wishing it were so might think. He was in the minority when he dissented at the Circuit Court level, and he is only 1/9th of the Supreme Court. What makes them think that there are 4 more votes on the Supreme Court that would add yet another level of moderation to Citizens free speech rights?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Dec 2018 @ 7:07am
Reasonable
...>subject to reasonable time, manner, and place restrictions."
Did they define reasonable? Did they specify the time, manner and place restrictions? I bet that Massachusetts legislators do something funky with this loophole that the courts left dangling.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Dec 2018 @ 7:35am
Circular reasoning turns into an ever closing circle.
If one limits themselves to doing the things their enemies do, then they will only be able to accomplish what their enemies can. If, however, one eliminates limits and do whatever, the possibility to create new enemies becomes endemic. If one is unconcerned about how many enemies one has, then there is no downside to creating new enemies, in fact there is very likely an upside.
The thing is, when those new enemies are in fact yourselves, finding ways to battle yourself creates new creative opportunities. After all, one can only shoot their selves in the foot so many times. At some point there is no foot left, and at some further points, the targets become fewer and fewer. For those who are bent on domination, there eventually will be nothing left to dominate. Then it becomes necessary to be creative when proclaiming who the winner is. I have no doubt those bent on domination have not thought this through, thoroughly.
On the post: Oxford University Gets Opposition To Its Attempt To Trademark 'Oxford' For All The Things
Hoping against hope
Hope springs eternal. What are the odds? How many things has the UK gotten right in recent memory? I am not sure, maybe some, but the list of horrible's is fairly long.
On the post: The Intelligence Community's Official Whistleblower Channel Is Going To Start Hunting Down Leakers
Who do they think they are?
And given the fact that they nominally work for us but don't view us as part of their stakeholder group is arrogant beyond means.
On the post: Report: CBP's Border Device Search Program Is An Undersupervised Catastrophe
Re: I’m not surprised
On the post: South Korea Continues To Criminalize Behavior Around Online Gaming At The Behest Of Video Game Industry
Re:
At which point the dark net will become the new Internet and control will be a thing of the past. And this evolution will be just a stepping stone as the dark dark net will be under development and by that time in beta testing.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Get a clue
Just because you want a subject brought up doesn't mean it will be brought up on any particular platform. Twitter might be doing it for political reasons. They also might not be doing it for other particular reasons. They might be doing it for some entirely different other reasons. Those reasons might be relevant to your agenda, and those reasons might not be relevant to your particular agenda.
But assuming that this is the time or place to discuss your agenda is your error, not anyone else.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Is Twitter Censoring Palestinian Activists?
There are many atrocities in the world today. They happen all over, and some may be tech related and others not. Still, Techdirt gets to decide which ones to cover, and why, not you.
We may condemn the supposed atrocity you point out, as a community. There is only so much bandwidth (aka number of articles per week, so to speak) and not all atrocities might make it past their filter. And believe that it is their filter to decide what to cover what not to.
Trying to re-think Twitters actions in any given instance isn't the point of Techdirt, proven by they aren't a Twitter only condemnation blog. That holds, even if they do sometimes point out Twitter in some articles for some reasons. I think their MO (modus operandi) is to make particular points when the opportunity offers rather than just following some political agenda or other. They could choose to, but that is wholly their decision, not yours.
On the post: Kansas Supreme Court Says Cops Can Search A House Without A Warrant As Long As They Claim They Smelled Marijuana
Multiple problems
To be fair, there are such persons known, and have ability thereto as supertasters. Since tasting is, as it were, limited to five things, sweet, alkaline, salinity, acidity, and umami, and the rest of 'taste' is actually olfactory (odor, what you smell either through the nose or through the throat to the nose) and that one cannot take place without the other. There is a possibility that Lawrence Police Officer Kimberly Nicholson is a supertaster, or more to the point, a super sniffer. And if she is, her time and talents are wasted being a cop, as supertasters are fairly rare.
But even if she is, that needs to be proved. And even if she is, her 'training and experience' needs to be quantified with how many time she 'sniffed' marijuana, and none was found verses the number of times she 'sniffed' marijuana and found some. Then to complicate matters, those times she smelled marijuana smoke and actual raw marijuana. Without admitting to anything, one is more pungent than the other, and the one less pungent is more difficult to detect.
In addition, while marijuana may or may not be legal in Kansas at the moment, there are a majority of states that have some form of marijuana legalization, many of them medical only, and others recreational, it may only be a matter of time before it becomes legalized, nationally. Then where will this 'precedent' stand?
In the meantime, should the 'defendants' have the resources, appealing this decision to higher authorities might get some of the questions above asked, and maybe a few that I, as a non-lawyer, haven't thought of.
On the post: Big Telecom Wants To Tax Netflix To Pay For Broadband Upgrades ISPs Refuse To Deploy Themselves
Re:
On the post: EU General Court Refuses To Allow St. Andrews Links To Trademark 'St. Andrews' For All The Things
Broken Inputs
The question is where did this idea of control come from? I don't mean simple control, but control over everything? Was it from earlier corporate entities, or from examples of government? Or just the idea of emulating previous powerful people?
Then there is the question of desire. Desire for control. Is it innate? Does it come within our genes? Is it something society instills? Is there a preternatural impulse that causes people to want control over everything related to them or their work or their personalities or their environment?
It doesn't exist in everyone. Some people have control over their control impulses and don't impugn them over everyone around them. Others, not so much.
Is it actually a disease? An aberration of personality? Something learned? Something done in imitation of adulated others? Is is something that should be desired? If so, why doesn't everyone have this impulse?
Should we, as the several societies that make up our world disdain this idea of control? If someone wants to control others then they should be, I don't know, at least remonstrated and kept from the ability to control others. Should that desire, that wanting to be in control be a warning sign of other undesirable traits?
There is a need for leaders. For someone to be the head of a company. For someone to be, at least for a time, the head of a country. But leaders with control issues are actually toxic, both to the entities they lead but to all those around them. Yet we keep putting people with control issues in positions of power. To wit, check out our current dear leader.
Part of the problem is that when choosing bosses we pick the wrong people. In some instances we pick the highest achievers, rather than the best supervisor. The best supervisor would probably make the better manager, the highest achiever is likely someone who has some portion of the control issue syndrome. We need both, but to put someone in a position of power because they are the highest achiever, rather than the better manager is a mistake we keep making. Both from a political standpoint, and a business one.
On the post: Arkansas Politician Introduces Bill To Make It Illegal For Social Media Companies To Block Content He Likes
Re:
FTFY
On the post: FCC Says It Will Finally Investigate Nation's Bullshit Broadband Availability Maps. Maybe.
FCC act? Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha, ha,...
Second, how do they expect to close the 'digital divide' without competition, something they seem adamantly opposed to? Of course, if the competition is actually allowed, then those competitors will be absorbed forthwith, that is as soon as they spent the money to improve rural broadband.
Third, what is, or could, the FCC do about the billions of dollars already given to the Telecom's/ISP's to do rural development that they have taken as profits and done very little to nothing about rural development?
Fourth, when and/or if the FCC actually gets accurate information on Broadband Availability, just what will they do about it? They seem to have given up their ability to supervise Telecom's/ISP's in their strained effort to eliminate net neutrality.
Fifth?
On the post: If You're Worried About Bad EU Internet Regulation, Just Wait Until You See The New Terrorist Regulation
Re: Re:
The bigger question is one of sovereignty, as Mason points out. How the hell does the EU expect to enforce their wet dream ejaculations anywhere other than in the EU? Sure there could be some economic sanctions, maybe something else. But actual enforcement?
OK, we have some examples of the US doing similar things (Kim Dotcom, whether you like him or not, US jurisdiction?) and others. But they haven't won in the case of Dotcom, and it's been what, 7 years?
This whole extraterritorial enforcement of local laws has got to stop.
On the post: Arkansas Politician Introduces Bill To Make It Illegal For Social Media Companies To Block Content He Likes
Re:
Got any citations with some verifiable fact based backup that the take downs you refer to are in fact political in nature, and not something else?
On the post: Big Telecom Claims Oversight & Accountability Violates Its First Amendment Rights
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Arkansas Politician Introduces Bill To Make It Illegal For Social Media Companies To Block Content He Likes
Re: r way it fails
On the post: Arkansas Politician Introduces Bill To Make It Illegal For Social Media Companies To Block Content He Likes
r way it fails
I wonder how many social media companies with at least 75 million subscribers reside in the state of Arkansas?
On the post: Big Telecom Claims Oversight & Accountability Violates Its First Amendment Rights
Re:
On the post: Big Telecom Claims Oversight & Accountability Violates Its First Amendment Rights
Companies have free speech rights that override...
...Citizens free speech rights?
I am not so sure that Brett Kavanaugh's ascension to the Supreme Court is as much a benefit to the concept as those wishing it were so might think. He was in the minority when he dissented at the Circuit Court level, and he is only 1/9th of the Supreme Court. What makes them think that there are 4 more votes on the Supreme Court that would add yet another level of moderation to Citizens free speech rights?
On the post: Federal Court Says Massachusetts' Wiretap Law Can't Be Used To Arrest People For Recording Public Officials
Reasonable
...>subject to reasonable time, manner, and place restrictions."
Did they define reasonable? Did they specify the time, manner and place restrictions? I bet that Massachusetts legislators do something funky with this loophole that the courts left dangling.
On the post: UK Spies Say They're Dropping Bulk Data Collection For Bulk Equipment Interference
Circular reasoning turns into an ever closing circle.
The thing is, when those new enemies are in fact yourselves, finding ways to battle yourself creates new creative opportunities. After all, one can only shoot their selves in the foot so many times. At some point there is no foot left, and at some further points, the targets become fewer and fewer. For those who are bent on domination, there eventually will be nothing left to dominate. Then it becomes necessary to be creative when proclaiming who the winner is. I have no doubt those bent on domination have not thought this through, thoroughly.
What a world...what a world...
Next >>