I think it would be a good thing to eliminate all the safe harbors. Then we could:
* Sue telephone companies for calls from advertisers who ignore the do-not-call lists * Sue chemical companies for the actions of contractors who dispose of waste improperly * Sue clothing providers for abuses of their suppliers overseas * Sue record companies for the raw lyrics of rappers * Sue power companies for food destroyed by prolonged power outages due to poorly maintained equipment * Sue toll agencies for accidents caused by other drivers on the tollways * Sue landlords for losses due to fires caused by other tenants * Sue banks for losses caused by mortgagors
I think this would be a "wonderful" boon to mankind; and I think someone should carefully explain this to the Honorable Representative Speier and to Professor Franks.
“no one interested in viewing or purchasing a glass sculpture … would be satisfied by mounting a copy of one of Ferguson’s photographs to his or her ceiling.”
It seems like this would be a useful argument for fair use in general. After all, no one (for example) would take a clip of 15 seconds of a song played while someone dances in a video, and install it on their iPod as a substitute for the real song.
Sorry, Senator, but I don't agree. The President might be able to if the NSA follows orders and doesn't lie to him about what they're acctually doing. But everything we've seen suggests exactly the opposite.
So let me get this straight: Bloggers aren't journalists because they don't get paid a pittance by a megolopoly; but those clowns at Fox News are?
How low we've become. Used to be that the local journalist was the guy who scribbled a few paragraphs on the back of a wanted poster and stapled it to his door.
Of course he could get shot if someone didn't like his news.
Maybe that would be better criteria: A journalist is someone who can get shot for doing their job.
But I suppose that leaves out Fox News, since only liberals hate them.
I understand the Court knows nothing of the threat.
But the Court is supposed to know "diddly" about the Constitution; and is supposed to make the executive and legislative branches provide more justification for breaching it than, "Because we gotta!"
So how about doing your job, and making the snoops explain why they think every citizen needs daily intrusion into their lives, to be safe.
Just for fun, I'd suggest you make them explain it in words of five letters or less; on threat of a summary adverse ruling.
Welcome to automated bureaucracy: Where idiotic and arbitrary bureaucratic rules are coded into a computer and enforced without human intervention.
Appeal? None, of course. The rules are the rules and the computer is always right.
Oh, a handful of decisions might get reviewed by an actual person, if the publicity is embarrassing enough (better luck winning the lottery). But human reviews are expensive and the rules set in code; so soon it is back to, "No appeal."
He's a perfect example of a mind-set I've discussed elsewhere.
People in the NSA aren't like you or I. If I became suspicious of John Doe, I would look at various information and make a decision as to whether or not my suspicions are founded. For people of this mindset of this NSA author, they look at all the data they have related to John Doe...and if they find nothing to confirm their suspicions then that is proof that they do not have enough data. These people are perfected cynics.
Because they must have "all data" to confirm their cynical suspicions, it is useless to assume that the national security apparati acquire anything less than what it is feasible (technically and financially) to acquire. Figures I did, and similar figures by Brewster Khale establish it is feasible technically and financially for the NSA to record all phone calls in the United States (and even the world, now) and to keep the recordings permanently.
Therefore, they are doing so: Assuming anything less fails to take into account their mindset. Which is always to keep everything, and keep it permanently.
After all, you never know when John Doe's guilt will be confirmed by something his great granddaddy said in a phone call.
"First of all, either this is deliberate fraud on Elsevier's part -- charging for the use of something that is free to use -- or it's a bug. Following Hanlon’s razor, I prefer the latter explanation. But assuming it's a bug, why has it taken two years to address?"
"This memorandum does not create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person."
So this was a joke on the departments. It's like telling someone they have to strip for the beach, and after their fear and embarrassment has peaked, shouting, "Only kidding!"
I think DHS should just roll the twenty most common given names (James, John, Robert, Michael, William, David, Richard, Charles, Joseph, Thomas, Mary, Patricia, Linda, Barbara, Elizabeth, Jennifer, Maria, Susan, Margaret and Dorothy) with the twenty most common surnames (Smith, Johnson, Williams, Jones, Brown, Davis, Miller, Wilson, Moore, Taylor, Anderson, Thomas, Jackson, White, Harris, Martin, Thompson, Garcia, Martinez and Robinson) and add those 400 names to the list.
That should cover, I don't know, what, half a billion people worldwide? Maybe then enough people would turn this into an election issue to finally get these idiotic lists burned.
These lists are the exact opposite of security anyway. Security is something you have to think about...actually use your brain. These lists are nothing but a recklessly moronic bureaucratic method to used to make brainless decisions.
Such as that 8-month-old David Jones can't fly. (Happy Barney voice: "Well [Duh!] of course he can't board, he's prolly gots a dangerous load in his diaper!") Meanwhile, the real terrorist David Jones boards a plane--carrying his knife, gun and bomb--under his fake-ID-backed alias, Adam Brown. (Same voice: "Well [Duh!] shure he gets to board...his name ain't on the list!")
If I were on the court, I would explain it this way: We understand you can't get a warrant because of the NDA. That's not a problem. Your problem is that no evidence taken via the stingray is admissible in this state without a warrant.
So you go ahead and deploy your stingray, but you just as well burn the tapes after you record them, because they are not entering a courtroom in this state.
Do you think NSA-subverted swiss-cheese encryption matters?
Okay, let's assume it does.
Then the NSA will simply use one of its TAO exploits to turn the servers into swiss cheese. Or the feeds to the servers. Or hire a spy into the admin corp to give them the encryption keys. Or listen to the machine chips running encryption keys and break them that way.
Given their demonstrated capabilities, you really think this is out of reach? Get real.
On the post: Federal Revenge Porn Bill Will Look To Criminalize Websites
Safe harbors must go
* Sue telephone companies for calls from advertisers who ignore the do-not-call lists
* Sue chemical companies for the actions of contractors who dispose of waste improperly
* Sue clothing providers for abuses of their suppliers overseas
* Sue record companies for the raw lyrics of rappers
* Sue power companies for food destroyed by prolonged power outages due to poorly maintained equipment
* Sue toll agencies for accidents caused by other drivers on the tollways
* Sue landlords for losses due to fires caused by other tenants
* Sue banks for losses caused by mortgagors
I think this would be a "wonderful" boon to mankind; and I think someone should carefully explain this to the Honorable Representative Speier and to Professor Franks.
On the post: Dick Cheney Lies: Claims Not A Single Case Of NSA Abusing Its Authority
This is a spokesman?
Who's your next spokesman? Donald Trump? Bob from Bob's Fine Used Cars?
On the post: Court Imposes Sanctions On Plaintiff After Bizarre Copyright Infringement/Defamation/Fraud/Privacy Invasion Lawsuit
Fair use
It seems like this would be a useful argument for fair use in general. After all, no one (for example) would take a clip of 15 seconds of a song played while someone dances in a video, and install it on their iPod as a substitute for the real song.
On the post: Senator Leahy: If President Obama Is Serious About Ending Bulk Collection, He Can Just End It This Friday
Sorry, Senator
On the post: Senator Schumer More Or Less Admits His 'Media Shield' Law Won't Protect Actual Journalists
Just want to be sure
How low we've become. Used to be that the local journalist was the guy who scribbled a few paragraphs on the back of a wanted poster and stapled it to his door.
Of course he could get shot if someone didn't like his news.
Maybe that would be better criteria: A journalist is someone who can get shot for doing their job.
But I suppose that leaves out Fox News, since only liberals hate them.
On the post: Judge Scalia Suggests The Supreme Court May Be Asked To Determine Constitutionality Of Metadata Program
Dear Justice Scalia
But the Court is supposed to know "diddly" about the Constitution; and is supposed to make the executive and legislative branches provide more justification for breaching it than, "Because we gotta!"
So how about doing your job, and making the snoops explain why they think every citizen needs daily intrusion into their lives, to be safe.
Just for fun, I'd suggest you make them explain it in words of five letters or less; on threat of a summary adverse ruling.
On the post: US Moral High Ground Completely Gone As China Demands US Stop Spying On Its Companies
Who needs it?
On the post: Apple Rejects Tank Battle 1942, Then Approves; Shows How Stupid The iOS Approval Process Is
Automated bureaucracy
Appeal? None, of course. The rules are the rules and the computer is always right.
Oh, a handful of decisions might get reviewed by an actual person, if the publicity is embarrassing enough (better luck winning the lottery). But human reviews are expensive and the rules set in code; so soon it is back to, "No appeal."
Such a wonderful future to anticipate.
On the post: NSA Official Uses LiveJournal-Like Board To Brag About 'Hunting SysAdmins'
Perfected cynicism
People in the NSA aren't like you or I. If I became suspicious of John Doe, I would look at various information and make a decision as to whether or not my suspicions are founded. For people of this mindset of this NSA author, they look at all the data they have related to John Doe...and if they find nothing to confirm their suspicions then that is proof that they do not have enough data. These people are perfected cynics.
Because they must have "all data" to confirm their cynical suspicions, it is useless to assume that the national security apparati acquire anything less than what it is feasible (technically and financially) to acquire. Figures I did, and similar figures by Brewster Khale establish it is feasible technically and financially for the NSA to record all phone calls in the United States (and even the world, now) and to keep the recordings permanently.
Therefore, they are doing so: Assuming anything less fails to take into account their mindset. Which is always to keep everything, and keep it permanently.
After all, you never know when John Doe's guilt will be confirmed by something his great granddaddy said in a phone call.
On the post: Elsevier Still Charging For Open Access Copies, Two Years After It Was Told Of The Problem
What bug?
Bug? Looks to me like this is a feature.
On the post: NSA Has Capability To Record And Store ALL Foreign Phone Calls In Certain Countries
On the post: The 'Most Transparent Administration In History' Sets New Record In Denying Freedom Of Information Requests
Did anyone read the memo?
So this was a joke on the departments. It's like telling someone they have to strip for the beach, and after their fear and embarrassment has peaked, shouting, "Only kidding!"
Or maybe the joke was on us?
On the post: '5G' Wireless Doesn't Even Technically Exist Yet, But Everyone's Pretty Sure It's Going To Fix Everything
Hush
On the post: US Relinquishing What Tiny Control It Had Of The Internet... If UN Isn't Allowed To Take Over
Who worries about foreign ownership...
ICANN, a wholly owned subsidiary of...
...Verisign.
...Microsoft.
...Apple.
...Oracle.
...IBM.
Let the bidding begin.
On the post: NSA About Attorney-Client Privilege Concerns: We'll Probably Grab Your Communications But We'll Try Not To 'Listen In'
Surreal?
On the post: Australian Man Banned From Filing Lawsuits After Filing 50 In 10 Years
What a disappointment
On the post: Australian Man Can't Get Parts Because His Super Generic Name Is On A US Terrorist Watchlist
Roll 'em
That should cover, I don't know, what, half a billion people worldwide? Maybe then enough people would turn this into an election issue to finally get these idiotic lists burned.
These lists are the exact opposite of security anyway. Security is something you have to think about...actually use your brain. These lists are nothing but a recklessly moronic bureaucratic method to used to make brainless decisions.
Such as that 8-month-old David Jones can't fly. (Happy Barney voice: "Well [Duh!] of course he can't board, he's prolly gots a dangerous load in his diaper!") Meanwhile, the real terrorist David Jones boards a plane--carrying his knife, gun and bomb--under his fake-ID-backed alias, Adam Brown. (Same voice: "Well [Duh!] shure he gets to board...his name ain't on the list!")
Even my cat uses a better system than this.
On the post: Police Tell Courts Non-Disclosure Agreement Prevents Them From Getting A Warrant For Cell Phone Tower Spoofers
No warrant, no admissibility
So you go ahead and deploy your stingray, but you just as well burn the tapes after you record them, because they are not entering a courtroom in this state.
On the post: Brazil, EU Take Pride In Temporarily Avoiding The NSA With New Joint Undersea Cable Run
Re:
Okay, let's assume it does.
Then the NSA will simply use one of its TAO exploits to turn the servers into swiss cheese. Or the feeds to the servers. Or hire a spy into the admin corp to give them the encryption keys. Or listen to the machine chips running encryption keys and break them that way.
Given their demonstrated capabilities, you really think this is out of reach? Get real.
On the post: Brazil, EU Take Pride In Temporarily Avoiding The NSA With New Joint Undersea Cable Run
Waste of time
Next >>