The comments in this thread make it very clear that it's impossible to talk about racism at all without upsetting somebody and having somebody think the talk itself is racist.
So we either let people talk, even if the talk is vile, and have free speech, or we just say the whole subject is taboo, and censor it. Sweep everything firmly under the rug.
Every online forum, from Usenet to Techdirt, to Reddit, every...
Wow. That definition of ‘online content sharing service provider’ would seem to encompass every site that allows user comments.
Because user comments are "copyright protected works or other protected subject-matter uploaded by its users which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes".
So this would shut down virtually all existing online speech. Every forum, every discussion site, every news provider that allows comments. Including this one.
I just think we have too many legislators who would have a tough time making a living doing anything else - who, in fact, have never supported themselves doing anything other than telling the rest of us how to live.
Such people oughtn't be telling anybody how to live. If they can't run their own lives well, why should we trust them to run ours?
Probably my elitism is showing, but I don't think it's wise to have people who need the $7500/month making policy.
I'd like to see policy made by people with deep knowledge and experience in the policy field at hand. People of demonstrated competence.
At a very minimum, they should have earned enough money, in their prior life before coming to policy-making, to pay their own rent.
People who can't afford to do that are not necessarily incompetent - they may just be young and inexperienced. But they haven't, yet, proven minimal competence.
On the post: Guy Pushing Hawley's 'Viewpoint Neutrality' Concept In The Media Used To Write For White Supremacist Site
Re: garbagedump.com
Already exists.
pastebin.com
On the post: The Ninth Circuit Broke The Internet. So We Asked Them To Unbreak It.
Re: Housing Discrimination?
So, we should also outlaw eBay?
Craigslist?
Newspaper classified ads?
All those earn money by facilitating commercial transactions. Some of which are bound to be illegal.
By your rule, no business could ever connect buyers and sellers without first vetting that each and every proposed transaction is legal.
On the post: Impossible Content Moderation Dilemmas: Talking About Racism Blocked As Hate Speech
Free speech or censorship?
The comments in this thread make it very clear that it's impossible to talk about racism at all without upsetting somebody and having somebody think the talk itself is racist.
So we either let people talk, even if the talk is vile, and have free speech, or we just say the whole subject is taboo, and censor it. Sweep everything firmly under the rug.
Which will it be?
On the post: Why Your Holiday Photos And Videos Of The Restored Notre Dame Cathedral Could Be Blocked By The EU's Upload Filters
If you don't want people to see it and take pictures of it
...don't put it in a public place.
How hard is that to understand, really?
On the post: Complete Overreaction: Professor Calls For Shutting Down Facebook Live, Post-Christchurch
One madman; no live TV for anyone from now on
No live conferences (so people can ask questions).
No live news events.
No live nothing, eh?
How about we just go full-on-Soviet and make it illegal for anybody to publish anything anywhere without government censor approval?
I'm sure Ms. Grygiel is a very nice person, except for being a Stalinist.
On the post: Axel Voss Says Maybe YouTube Shouldn't Exist
Every online forum, from Usenet to Techdirt, to Reddit, every...
Wow. That definition of ‘online content sharing service provider’ would seem to encompass every site that allows user comments.
Because user comments are "copyright protected works or other protected subject-matter uploaded by its users which it organises and promotes for profit-making purposes".
So this would shut down virtually all existing online speech. Every forum, every discussion site, every news provider that allows comments. Including this one.
On the post: Auto Finance Company Sues Massachusetts City Over Its Unconstitutional Sale Of Seized Vehicles
Re: Re: Hoping for a good popcorn moment!
Take your allies where you find them.
Anyway, corporations are just groups of people. Who have constitutional rights. Nothing about joining with others makes those rights go away.
On the post: Momo Hoax Shows America's Susceptibility To Bullshit Goes Well Beyond Social Media
Re: hardly the first hoax amplified.
Scary clowns.
Poison/razor blades in Halloween candy.
Missing children.
Alar on apples.
Nuclear dangers.
Unnatural foods.
GMOs.
...
...
I blame television, esp. the 24/7 cable news channels. They're tailored to bored people with nothing better to do than watch TV.
On the post: Stupid Patent Of The Month: Veripath Patents Following Privacy Laws
Re: has never used (or even heard of) a website
I've been told that patent examiners are not allowed to search the web, or use online references, for prior art.
It has to be on published on paper or it doesn't count.
Patent office rules, obviously, not legislation.
(This was some years ago - things may have changed.)
On the post: California AG Says Journalist Broke The Law By Obtaining A List Of Convicted Officers Via A Public Records Request
Re: Re: Re: That can't be right...
...and of course, what fraction of crooked cops actually get convicted by a court?
Whatever the number is, it's surely less than the conviction rate for guilty non-cops.
On the post: California AG Says Journalist Broke The Law By Obtaining A List Of Convicted Officers Via A Public Records Request
Re: Re: Re: That can't be right...
That would be "only" 1.5% of officers that are convicted in a given year.
But far more than 1.5% must be crooked, because the average officer tenure is surely much longer than one year.
If we assume average tenure is 10 years (not unreasonable I think; these are union jobs) then it's 15% that are crooked.
On the post: AI Writes Article About AI: Does The Newspaper Hold The Copyright?
Re: Re: Another possibility
I mean, unless the AI is actually sentient. I think we're a LONG way from that.
On the post: AI Writes Article About AI: Does The Newspaper Hold The Copyright?
Re: Another possibility
Employer? What employer?
Are you thinking that the AI machine is an "employee"?
It's a piece of machinery.
On the post: Interested In Helping Advance Tech Policy In The Right Direction? Here's An Amazing Opportunity
Re: Re: Re: How much does that actually defray?
I understand where you're coming from.
I just think we have too many legislators who would have a tough time making a living doing anything else - who, in fact, have never supported themselves doing anything other than telling the rest of us how to live.
Such people oughtn't be telling anybody how to live. If they can't run their own lives well, why should we trust them to run ours?
On the post: Interested In Helping Advance Tech Policy In The Right Direction? Here's An Amazing Opportunity
Re: How much does that actually defray?
Probably my elitism is showing, but I don't think it's wise to have people who need the $7500/month making policy.
I'd like to see policy made by people with deep knowledge and experience in the policy field at hand. People of demonstrated competence.
At a very minimum, they should have earned enough money, in their prior life before coming to policy-making, to pay their own rent.
People who can't afford to do that are not necessarily incompetent - they may just be young and inexperienced. But they haven't, yet, proven minimal competence.
On the post: How My High School Destroyed An Immigrant Kid's Life Because He Drew The School's Mascot
Re: a school shooting every day
There were 23 school shooting incidents in the USA last year (ref: https://www.bbc.com/news/business-46507514).
Given 365 days in the year, that means the probability of a school shooting in your school is 23/(100,000 * 365).
That's less than 1 in a million. (1 in 1.59 million)
Moral panic.
On the post: How My High School Destroyed An Immigrant Kid's Life Because He Drew The School's Mascot
Re: Yet Another School Shooting
What can they do to mitigate the situation that school administrators and teachers can't also do?
Other than to militarize and criminalize childhood?
On the post: NY Governor Offers Journalists A Gift No Journalist Would Be Interested In Receiving
How we get more laws
2. People: There ought to be a law!
3. Courts: There already is a law. The criminal broke it.
4. Politician: Obviously the law isn't working; we need a new law!
5. Voters: Re-elect politician for "solving the problem"
Now there are two laws.
Repeat.
On the post: Max Schrems Files New Privacy Complaints That Seem To Show The Impossibility Of Complying With The GDPR
Re: A little naive with point #2.
How do you think having the GDPR is going to help anyone here?
On the post: Vizio Admits Modern TV Sets Are Cheaper Because They're Spying On You
Can't I just put a piece of tape over the camera lens?
Problem solved.
Next >>