Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:57pm
Re: Re: Ignoring the usual copyright path also works.
And yet some absolute positions are 'enhanced' with 'bogus statistics' that keep getting iterated, regardless of accuracy or substance. To them, correct. To any thinking, logical person with integrity, not so much. (Note I leave out the morons in a hurry, 'cause they're morons).
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:38pm
Re: Next Up
I would be more worried about those computer monitors watching what goes on in your bedroom. That is assuming that you have a computer monitor, or TV in your bedroom. Or that you keep your, ahem, behavior in the bedroom. -:)
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 5:35pm
Growing pains are painful, but also avoidable
It's gonna take some time, decades maybe, but eventually the judiciary will have some real concept of tech. Understand the difference between hardware and OS and base installation vs downloadable apps.
But it will not be universal. There are too many countries that decry tech as evil to make it so. Or they want control more than anything else.
The bigger problem is when one country tries to impose their rules on everyone else. That cannot fly. But it starts in the judiciaries understanding of tech.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:49pm
Re:
When is an undocumented 'supposed fact' ever proposed in a way that it is not claiming to be proven fact? Given that concept, when is a 'supposed fact' that is not documentable not a lie?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:46pm
Re: Re: Journalistic opinion
Yeah, I stopped watching PBS News Hour after Ray Suarez allowed his guest to state many falsehoods and failed to challenge him in any way. It is tough to present a both sides argument in the typical news piece, what maybe 2 or 3 minutes long? The news magazine format offers more time, but then there are other factors at play, like advertisers for example. Or whatever was on Ray's mind that day.
Print media have some of the same problems, there is only so much space in x number of pages, constrained by all those ads.
So we come down to the Internet. There are no space issues, only attention span. How one goes about giving both sides of an argument and retain the readers or listeners, or watchers interest is a big issue. Maybe more than one article, or podcast, or video. One for each side and yet another conclusatory. That leaves the possibility to be quoted out of context. Not a good thing, but regardless of format not preventable.
That's why I said facts must have sources. Provable sources. If an opinion is based in fact, then those sources should be listed. If the opinion is stated in a short format like Twitter (an abomination to my thinking) then the underlying facts should be linked.
So far as media outlets not inviting opposing or folks with opinions based on 'false facts' (and here comes the discussion of whether facts are provable or false, a lesson our dear president needs not to just understand, but practice, which would screw his agenda greatly) I am not sure that excluding them is the right way to go. There is some editorial control over who speaks first and who speaks last and what the 'conclusions' are after both sides are heard. The problem is whether those conclusions are ideologically or logically constructed.
Hence the need for identification, fact (supported) or opinion (supported or not supported) by provable facts.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:20pm
Ignoring the usual copyright path also works.
We probably won't hear from the usual pro-copyright strict constructionist here as it is hard to argue with a copyright holder who is successful in giving away their content. Successful in that they are still alive and happy to continue to give away their content.
Whether they are rich or not is not at issue, because it does not appear to be an issue with them. Hmm, are they rich? How does one define rich. Is it a solely monetary construct, or does rich in satisfaction come into play. Don't ask a pro-copyright strict constructionist as the answer will be skewed toward money.
Those pro-copyright strict constructionists are probably sad because this model destroys many, if not all of their arguments.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 23 Oct 2018 @ 3:09pm
Journalistic opinion
The only caveat I care about is that journalists identify opinion vs fact.
The facts must have sources, and anonymous sources should be considered sketchy.
Opinions should have reasons, based in facts. While analysis might be wrong, if they document how they got there, wrong analysis or opinion could be forgiven.
Lies are a different story. Lies are supposed facts without documentation.
Statistics only count when the studies are peer reviewed and the methodology strictly scrutinized and found unwanting.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 8:50pm
Re: Re: Double Standards
If copyright is automatic for fashion, as it is in every other case, then their documentation of their original design presentation gets them the win. The cost of suing the parties infringing might seem prohibitive, in both dollars and time. Even if they win in the sense of dollars.
The other issue, trademark, where it doesn't appear that any logos that might cause confusion was involved, merely the name Blair, as in Peter-Blair Accessories vs Blair Corporation seems overly litigious as I cannot see any confusion between the two. Just a bully trying to 'protect' their name, even when there is no confusion likely.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:55pm
Re:
The law is the law, and while police officers will try to stretch the law to their benefit, they must have some other reason to arrest someone in order to get the ID they wanted in the first place. Otherwise it will get tossed, and the made up reason for arrest might also get tossed.
Now there are a lot of reasons to arrest someone, legitimate or not. Then there is the meme that 'you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride'. Until there is sufficient feedback (officers fired and/or arrested and sent to jail for violating the law) this will continue. The problem is how to energize the feedback, without more innocent citizens being killed.
The good cop/bad cop issue still stands. There are good cops out there, but are they good if they allow bad cops to continue their abuse? Yes there is feedback within the force, if good cops speak out they are punished. That will continue until there is some mechanism to protect good cops. That means that the higher ups need to be on the side of good cops. There is a likelihood that some bad cops have risen in rank, and will protect those below them that do not deserve protection.
So what do we do? Fire all higher ranking cops? Fire all cops? Insert people who will tell the rest of us about the bad guys? There is a certain truth about institutional memory. Remembering how to investigate, old style, is important. Remembering how to protect those that don't conform with 'our way' is not. There needs to be a method that returns integrity to the situation. This is complicated by the number of departments across the nation. That integrity needs to be in each and every one of them. Not just one.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 6:08pm
Double Standards
The copyright conundrum has confused me yet again. If in all other works a copyright is imposed upon creation and one entity produces a work which is then copied, then how can the copier be the one to make the claim that the originator copied the copier? Cannot the originator provide some dated evidence of their prior art?
Is this a situation where in the fashion industry a copyright must be registered, as apposed to other forms of copyright?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 5:31pm
Re: Re: Re:
You missed this part:
"...which could be translated into 'authoritarian, I don't take no shit from anyone so don't even try it with me' which some would characterize as 'bullying in the first degree'."
I guess?
Command presence is what they call it. What it is in action is different?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 5:08pm
Re: One of those times when being right is cold comfort
Sex work has been characterized as the 'oldest profession'. I am not sure about that, money changer might be in competition. But it does bring up the question as to the state of the 'pimp'. Where does that profession fall in the mix professional age?
Which then brings us to safe. There are two basic ways to be unsafe, one of which is venereal disease, and the other is pregnancy. Now we add the pimp into the question along with other forms of slavery and other forms of unsafe come into question. Do I need to detail how a pimp might make sex work unsafe?
If FOSTA actually wanted to protect sex workers, they would have made pimping illegal, and required, well I wanted to say registration but that would become public and that isn't good, but they should have regular, maybe monthly, maybe more, health checkups. Maybe there are better ways to protect sex workers, but allowing pimps isn't one of them.
Now I am sure that pimping is actually illegal in most if not all places in the US. But FOSTA did not go after them, they went after websites. Which brings us to the real reason for FOSTA, which has nothing to do with sex trafficking, pimps, or sex workers.
It has to do with control. They wanted the ability to shut down sites that they 'claim' have to do with something they don't like. They can liken many things to being 'related' to sex trafficking, whether it is or it isn't, but the site gets shut down.
The beatings will continue until someone with sufficient resources (or the wherewithal to get a gofundme in appropriate amounts) to carry a prosecution under this law to the SCOTUS (if needed), and then we will see how this new constitution of the court reacts with regard to the 1st Amendment. We will need other cases to determine this new 'courts' attitude toward the rest of the Constitution.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:43pm
Re:
Probably. But I suspect they keep it to how to achieve and maintain the 'command presence' which could be translated into 'authoritarian, I don't take no shit from anyone so don't even try it with me' which some would characterize as 'bullying in the first degree'. And they are happy with that, even when it doesn't seem to help their public perception.
Maybe the police need a good PR firm. One of the problems with that ideas is...would they listen?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:37pm
Rechargeable vs battery
I have a similar, though different brand, toothbrush. I also had a rechargeable beard trimmer. Both of these units self destructed due to the batteries becoming unchargeable. I replaced my beard trimmer with one that uses AA batteries, which could be rechargeable. Why the toothbrush makers don't have some similar units is beyond me.
I have looked for, but have not found any 'sonic' type electric toothbrushes (I do like their performance) that use replaceable batteries, rechargeable or not. $50-$90 is too much to to discard such a unit when normal toothbrushes go for around $2-$3 apiece. The additional capability (which I like) does not justify the replacement cost.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 4:08pm
Re: Re: Hoping that's a typo
Are you assuming that one side or the other is having more fun? It might be a good way to sell hair coloring products but not a good way to sell telecom services.
Which makes one wonder, well two things, first are the customers being rebated appropriate amounts of money for their lack of service, and why the hell would anyone actually want a service that was so easily disabled?
Sure, the up-time (for this comment we will leave out reasons other than natural disasters when considering reasons for downtime) is significantly higher than downtime, but I would imagine that communication in times of emergency would be high on the list of reasons people might have telecom capabilities.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 3:59pm
Bass-ackwards
I recently read some statistics, .3% to .4% of a populations were members of the police department. These numbers, (not necessarily accurately quoted but close enough for government work) were for major urban areas, at the same time they seem reasonable for non urban, or even rural areas. And they have not been verified by me in any way, but seem believable enough.
The thing is, if true, that means that the state legislature, certain civil rights groups, and law enforcement organizations, think that their .4% trumps our 99.6%, in the concept of who has the power. Or should have. Is it because they have guns, the power of arrest, the inculcated perspective that they will be believed over us criminals? Some other delusion?
Curiously, those civil rights groups that participated in this quagmire might serious rethink their commitment to civil rights, unless those some other groups that were involved are just characterized as civil rights groups (maybe some law enforcement unions who are looking after the civil rights of their membership?).
Where is the law that says law enforcement agents have to know the law in order to enforce the law? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents know what civilian rights are, and that they have to respect not just those rights but the people who have them? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents should learn how earning respect is done by giving respect upon penalty of termination due to lack of public respect?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 22 Oct 2018 @ 3:19pm
Re: CI statement doesn't make sense
You left out the part where the cop went to the trash, picked up the drugs, took them home, and either used them or resold them.
There are other possibilities, I guess. The fact that said drug deal took place merely in the imaginations of the cops, who then probably testified that they actually saw what was merely in their imaginations makes one wonder if they are actually that deluded because they used the drugs, or because they have institutionalized fabricating evidence.
On the post: El-P: We Make Our Music Available For Free And Trust Our Fans To Support Us, And We Always Will
Re: Re: Ignoring the usual copyright path also works.
On the post: Mexico Reverses Ban On Selling Roku Hardware After Absurd Piracy Ruling
Re: Next Up
On the post: Mexico Reverses Ban On Selling Roku Hardware After Absurd Piracy Ruling
Growing pains are painful, but also avoidable
But it will not be universal. There are too many countries that decry tech as evil to make it so. Or they want control more than anything else.
The bigger problem is when one country tries to impose their rules on everyone else. That cannot fly. But it starts in the judiciaries understanding of tech.
On the post: Axios Ridiculously Calls For Newsrooms To Ban Journalists From Having Opinions Online
Re:
On the post: Axios Ridiculously Calls For Newsrooms To Ban Journalists From Having Opinions Online
Re: Re: Journalistic opinion
Print media have some of the same problems, there is only so much space in x number of pages, constrained by all those ads.
So we come down to the Internet. There are no space issues, only attention span. How one goes about giving both sides of an argument and retain the readers or listeners, or watchers interest is a big issue. Maybe more than one article, or podcast, or video. One for each side and yet another conclusatory. That leaves the possibility to be quoted out of context. Not a good thing, but regardless of format not preventable.
That's why I said facts must have sources. Provable sources. If an opinion is based in fact, then those sources should be listed. If the opinion is stated in a short format like Twitter (an abomination to my thinking) then the underlying facts should be linked.
So far as media outlets not inviting opposing or folks with opinions based on 'false facts' (and here comes the discussion of whether facts are provable or false, a lesson our dear president needs not to just understand, but practice, which would screw his agenda greatly) I am not sure that excluding them is the right way to go. There is some editorial control over who speaks first and who speaks last and what the 'conclusions' are after both sides are heard. The problem is whether those conclusions are ideologically or logically constructed.
Hence the need for identification, fact (supported) or opinion (supported or not supported) by provable facts.
On the post: El-P: We Make Our Music Available For Free And Trust Our Fans To Support Us, And We Always Will
Ignoring the usual copyright path also works.
Whether they are rich or not is not at issue, because it does not appear to be an issue with them. Hmm, are they rich? How does one define rich. Is it a solely monetary construct, or does rich in satisfaction come into play. Don't ask a pro-copyright strict constructionist as the answer will be skewed toward money.
Those pro-copyright strict constructionists are probably sad because this model destroys many, if not all of their arguments.
On the post: Axios Ridiculously Calls For Newsrooms To Ban Journalists From Having Opinions Online
Journalistic opinion
The facts must have sources, and anonymous sources should be considered sketchy.
Opinions should have reasons, based in facts. While analysis might be wrong, if they document how they got there, wrong analysis or opinion could be forgiven.
Lies are a different story. Lies are supposed facts without documentation.
Statistics only count when the studies are peer reviewed and the methodology strictly scrutinized and found unwanting.
On the post: Ajit Pai, Telecom Lobbyists Are Now Coordinating Their Lies In Perfect Symmetry
Re: Re: Little bit redundant
Possibly not, but there would be a certain satisfaction. There is that old saw...a journey of 1000 miles begins with one step...
On the post: One Company's Story Of The Soft Cost Of Aggressive Trademark Enforcement
Re: Re: Double Standards
The other issue, trademark, where it doesn't appear that any logos that might cause confusion was involved, merely the name Blair, as in Peter-Blair Accessories vs Blair Corporation seems overly litigious as I cannot see any confusion between the two. Just a bully trying to 'protect' their name, even when there is no confusion likely.
On the post: Texas Teens Can't Graduate High School Until They've Been Told How To Behave Around Cops
Re:
Now there are a lot of reasons to arrest someone, legitimate or not. Then there is the meme that 'you can beat the charge but you can't beat the ride'. Until there is sufficient feedback (officers fired and/or arrested and sent to jail for violating the law) this will continue. The problem is how to energize the feedback, without more innocent citizens being killed.
The good cop/bad cop issue still stands. There are good cops out there, but are they good if they allow bad cops to continue their abuse? Yes there is feedback within the force, if good cops speak out they are punished. That will continue until there is some mechanism to protect good cops. That means that the higher ups need to be on the side of good cops. There is a likelihood that some bad cops have risen in rank, and will protect those below them that do not deserve protection.
So what do we do? Fire all higher ranking cops? Fire all cops? Insert people who will tell the rest of us about the bad guys? There is a certain truth about institutional memory. Remembering how to investigate, old style, is important. Remembering how to protect those that don't conform with 'our way' is not. There needs to be a method that returns integrity to the situation. This is complicated by the number of departments across the nation. That integrity needs to be in each and every one of them. Not just one.
On the post: One Company's Story Of The Soft Cost Of Aggressive Trademark Enforcement
Double Standards
Is this a situation where in the fashion industry a copyright must be registered, as apposed to other forms of copyright?
On the post: Texas Teens Can't Graduate High School Until They've Been Told How To Behave Around Cops
Re: Re: Re:
You missed this part:
I guess?
Command presence is what they call it. What it is in action is different?
On the post: Another Report Shows That FOSTA Increased (Not Decreased) Sex Trafficking; Where Is The Outrage?
Re: One of those times when being right is cold comfort
Which then brings us to safe. There are two basic ways to be unsafe, one of which is venereal disease, and the other is pregnancy. Now we add the pimp into the question along with other forms of slavery and other forms of unsafe come into question. Do I need to detail how a pimp might make sex work unsafe?
If FOSTA actually wanted to protect sex workers, they would have made pimping illegal, and required, well I wanted to say registration but that would become public and that isn't good, but they should have regular, maybe monthly, maybe more, health checkups. Maybe there are better ways to protect sex workers, but allowing pimps isn't one of them.
Now I am sure that pimping is actually illegal in most if not all places in the US. But FOSTA did not go after them, they went after websites. Which brings us to the real reason for FOSTA, which has nothing to do with sex trafficking, pimps, or sex workers.
It has to do with control. They wanted the ability to shut down sites that they 'claim' have to do with something they don't like. They can liken many things to being 'related' to sex trafficking, whether it is or it isn't, but the site gets shut down.
The beatings will continue until someone with sufficient resources (or the wherewithal to get a gofundme in appropriate amounts) to carry a prosecution under this law to the SCOTUS (if needed), and then we will see how this new constitution of the court reacts with regard to the 1st Amendment. We will need other cases to determine this new 'courts' attitude toward the rest of the Constitution.
On the post: Texas Teens Can't Graduate High School Until They've Been Told How To Behave Around Cops
Re:
Maybe the police need a good PR firm. One of the problems with that ideas is...would they listen?
On the post: Daily Deal: Platinum Sonic Toothbrush & USB Sanitizing Case
Rechargeable vs battery
I have looked for, but have not found any 'sonic' type electric toothbrushes (I do like their performance) that use replaceable batteries, rechargeable or not. $50-$90 is too much to to discard such a unit when normal toothbrushes go for around $2-$3 apiece. The additional capability (which I like) does not justify the replacement cost.
On the post: Consumer Groups Say FCC Deregulatory Fever Harming Hurricane Michael Recovery
Re: Re: Hoping that's a typo
Which makes one wonder, well two things, first are the customers being rebated appropriate amounts of money for their lack of service, and why the hell would anyone actually want a service that was so easily disabled?
Sure, the up-time (for this comment we will leave out reasons other than natural disasters when considering reasons for downtime) is significantly higher than downtime, but I would imagine that communication in times of emergency would be high on the list of reasons people might have telecom capabilities.
On the post: Texas Teens Can't Graduate High School Until They've Been Told How To Behave Around Cops
Bass-ackwards
The thing is, if true, that means that the state legislature, certain civil rights groups, and law enforcement organizations, think that their .4% trumps our 99.6%, in the concept of who has the power. Or should have. Is it because they have guns, the power of arrest, the inculcated perspective that they will be believed over us criminals? Some other delusion?
Curiously, those civil rights groups that participated in this quagmire might serious rethink their commitment to civil rights, unless those some other groups that were involved are just characterized as civil rights groups (maybe some law enforcement unions who are looking after the civil rights of their membership?).
Where is the law that says law enforcement agents have to know the law in order to enforce the law? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents know what civilian rights are, and that they have to respect not just those rights but the people who have them? Where is the law that says law enforcement agents should learn how earning respect is done by giving respect upon penalty of termination due to lack of public respect?
On the post: Arkansas Police Department Has Been Engaging In Illegal Drug Raids For Years
Re: CI statement doesn't make sense
There are other possibilities, I guess. The fact that said drug deal took place merely in the imaginations of the cops, who then probably testified that they actually saw what was merely in their imaginations makes one wonder if they are actually that deluded because they used the drugs, or because they have institutionalized fabricating evidence.
On the post: Consumer Groups Say FCC Deregulatory Fever Harming Hurricane Michael Recovery
Re: Re: Re: I TOLD YOU SOOOOOOOOO
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Since someone invoked open source
Next >>