Place that statement in the government context where everything is over-classified and you may have to fight tooth and nail to see completely unclassified documents. None of them pay attention, it's all super above top secret for most practical purposes and that's her intent in what she said.
It's funny how large numbers of people seem to forget all sorts of things they recognize elsewhere when it comes to Hillary, not that i have any interest in defending her.
Never mind the long history of administrations or anyone else who purposely hide or delete their email and records or simply would not respond to any information requests. I would suspect this is exactly why everything was moved off to a personal server -- because occasionally some court agrees that records should be released or someone makes a big enough deal out of it that the records matter. At least briefly in the national attention span. And it's hilarious if anyone thinks Hillary is the only one, or anyone else would be different.
Re: Re: Re: Re: "Ignore the experts, here's what it REALLY means..."
Except that this is not what is at work here. It's an open license, not a negotiated contract. Great Minds adopted and used (supplied) to their own detriment someone else's work without some combination of enough understanding, questions, or lawyers. This might holed if the those bound by the terms (the consumers copying the work) had misunderstood. Which is pretty much the problem everyone who is confused by cc-by-nc-sa has. If you are using a license without reading it, don't expect those who consume your content to read it either.
Trump asserts that the The Daily Mail consciously doubted the truth of the claims in the article, but decided to publish it anyway, and that reporters there can't simply rely on "unsubstantiated" claims and "an unauthorized book written by malicious and bitter 'reporters' who have never met or spoken to Ms. Trump."
So questioning the veracity of something is now "relying on it".
Of course, these people clearly know the value of the public hearing the wrong thing first, even if it is reported in the negative, since they make use of it at every opportunity.
If the USF ever did anything aside from adding to the profit margin of large telecoms, and later, ISPs, the entire planet could probably have been wired twice.
Compelling interests come crawling out of the woodwork daily. I don't know what sort of thing that language would address, given the penchant for massive over-classification.
Security is hard, but people mostly grow them there low-hanging fruit trees. (Attackers with a specific target in mind, of course, would just try harder.)
Disk encryption could be a thing, but I'm thinking that there isn't really a good argument for encryption-friendliness here. But sometimes bad arguments are what you need to influence morons.
The problem is... this is what the news organizations do, and they get away with it.
There is always someone who wants to make a buck off something intangible that involved roughly zero cost just because there is high demand. But the bigger issue here is it's the "little guy" who doesn't get to monetize their video or whatever, to the extent large organization can, and the "little guy" is the one who tends to get nailed with infringement cases or takedown notices they can't really fight.
Balance that inequality, and enshrine at least some specific basics of Fair Use so it isn't always a damn trip to court, and a lot of this will stop.
For the big whiners, they can offer some organization a period of exclusive scoop time before they post it to the world, but those organizations like to have exclusive rights and then yell infringement if anyone else uses the clips.
So fair use or not, the system and power differential is unfair, and yeah i can see why someone might want a slice of the goodies that others, especially large organizations, have made using their (admittedly usually zero-investment) content. (Although in a lot of these cases, with police, there are levels of risk to sticking around, recording, and hoping to get away with your phone.)
On the post: FBI Publishes Clinton Email Investigation Documents; More Bad News On Documents Mishandling, FOIA Compliance
Re:
It's funny how large numbers of people seem to forget all sorts of things they recognize elsewhere when it comes to Hillary, not that i have any interest in defending her.
On the post: FBI Publishes Clinton Email Investigation Documents; More Bad News On Documents Mishandling, FOIA Compliance
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Creative Commons Wants To Step Into Lawsuit Over Definition Of 'Noncommercial' In A CC License
Re: Re: Re: Re: "Ignore the experts, here's what it REALLY means..."
On the post: Melania Trump Sues Daily Mail & A Blogger Over Stories, Using Peter Thiel/Hulk Hogan's Lawyer
So questioning the veracity of something is now "relying on it".
Of course, these people clearly know the value of the public hearing the wrong thing first, even if it is reported in the negative, since they make use of it at every opportunity.
On the post: AT&T, Poster Child For Government Favoritism, Mocks Google Fiber For Government Favoritism
What country would that be? The Duchy of Grand Fenwick?
On the post: AT&T, Poster Child For Government Favoritism, Mocks Google Fiber For Government Favoritism
Re: Universal Service Fund
On the post: EFF, ACLU Asks Ninth Circuit Court To Rehear Two Recent CFAA Cases
But you can.
On the post: Twitter Suspends YouTube Phenom PewDiePie For Making A Stupid ISIS Joke
Re: Re:
On the post: Twitter Suspends YouTube Phenom PewDiePie For Making A Stupid ISIS Joke
Re: Re: Re: Yea... yea...
On the post: Germany Interior Minister Pushing For Deployment Of Facial Recognition Software In Public Areas
It's also makes for nicely concentrated targets for the sort of terrorist attacks they think or pretend they can prevent.
On the post: Another Unfortunate Example Of Facebook Silencing Important Videos
Re:
On the post: A Possible Solution To Twitter's Difficult Problem Of Abusive Behavior: Let People Speak, Don't Force Everyone To Listen
Re:
On the post: Publishers Association Sends Whiny Complaint Letter To Dean After Academic Librarian Discusses Sci-Hub
Re: No loaded language here, not at all...
No, they aren't taking the original articles. They are breaking in to government copyright offices and changing the names on the copyright records.
On the post: Here Is The End Result Of The USOC And NBC's Over-Protectionist Olympic Nonsense
Re: Only the Old Ones remember
On the post: DOJ Finally Going To Force Law Enforcement Agencies To Hand Over Info On People Killed By Police Officers
Re:
On the post: US Government Now Has An Official Open Source Software Policy
On the post: Will DNC Email Hacking Make Legislators More Friendly To Encryption?
Re:
Disk encryption could be a thing, but I'm thinking that there isn't really a good argument for encryption-friendliness here. But sometimes bad arguments are what you need to influence morons.
On the post: The Coming Copyright Fight Over Viral News Videos, Such As Police Shootings
There is always someone who wants to make a buck off something intangible that involved roughly zero cost just because there is high demand. But the bigger issue here is it's the "little guy" who doesn't get to monetize their video or whatever, to the extent large organization can, and the "little guy" is the one who tends to get nailed with infringement cases or takedown notices they can't really fight.
Balance that inequality, and enshrine at least some specific basics of Fair Use so it isn't always a damn trip to court, and a lot of this will stop.
For the big whiners, they can offer some organization a period of exclusive scoop time before they post it to the world, but those organizations like to have exclusive rights and then yell infringement if anyone else uses the clips.
So fair use or not, the system and power differential is unfair, and yeah i can see why someone might want a slice of the goodies that others, especially large organizations, have made using their (admittedly usually zero-investment) content. (Although in a lot of these cases, with police, there are levels of risk to sticking around, recording, and hoping to get away with your phone.)
On the post: Government Accountability Office Study Confirms: Patent Office Encouraged Examiners To Approve Crappy Patents
Re:
On the post: Government Accountability Office Study Confirms: Patent Office Encouraged Examiners To Approve Crappy Patents
Re: Quality vs Quantity
Next >>