Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 24 Jun 2011 @ 4:46am
Re: Re: Oh yah
Are you sure he didn't do it?
It doesn't matter whether he did it or not. The kid is a minor. He has a right to have his parents/guardians with him during police questioning, and that desire was made clear to the police. Everyone has a right to have an attorney present during questioning, and that desire was made clear as well.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 23 Jun 2011 @ 2:16pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is already being done
Again, there are legitimate commercial uses for encryption but they are vastly outnumbered by the illegitimate uses for encryption.
I thought your first comment was sarcasm, but apparently not. That statement shows how completely clueless you are in regards to current technology and security issues.
I'll take you through an average day of mine and how often I use encryption for legitimate (if not absolutely necessary) reasons.
-Wake up. Blah.
-Check email/social media. Each login is a secure, encrypted authentication.(1)
-Shower. Listen to Pandora on my phone using my encrypted(2) wifi.
-Drive to work.
-Boot up my work laptop. Log in to the hard drive full disk encryption before even the operating system loads.(3)
-Start up Outlook for email. I have a digital signature - a form of public key/private key encryption.(4)
-Do work. Just FYI, I work in the Cryptographic Services group at a major bank. I'm on a project that involves deploying hard drive encryption to unencrypted machines - something which the federal regulators have insisted on as a result of BigBank1 buying BigBank2 (who went under during the financial mess 2 years ago).
-Transfer files using secure FTP(5) to vendor to assist in diagnosing issue.
-Leave work. Stop somewhere for food on the way home. Use their free wifi. Login to my work VPN(6) and finish up work stuff.
-Get home.
-Login to a game or two.(7)
-Perform some unauthorized copyright infringement using BitTorrent just for kicks.
So, encryption has:
-Kept my logins secure (1)(7)
-Prevented unauthorized access to my internet connection to stop evil dirty pirates from using it (2)
-Kept the contents of my hard drive secure, which can include sensitive corporate information (3)
-Verified my identity to coworkers and vendors (4)
-Safely allowed transfer for sensitive data over the internet.(5)
-Prevented wifi eavesdropping on a public network (6)
So if you bank with BigBank1 or BigBank2(now a part of BigBank1), you can thank me by keeping your information secure with encryption. if you're not a customer of one of these banks, you better hope your bank is using encryption.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 23 Jun 2011 @ 6:55am
Re: Facebook should be sued and/or shutdown
Seriously though, what idiot would help the guy during the standoff? Surely he had to know he could/would get caught and get in trouble?
If pointing out something that's happening in public is illegal, then wouldn't the TV news crews that show up and usually broadcast live during similar situations also be illegal? Police can, and regularly do, move people and press out of the area for this and other reasons - why not this time?
I haven't made up my mind on it exactly, but I think a snap decision without knowing all the facts as to what was going on isn't a good idea.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 22 Jun 2011 @ 2:34pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
As the Court explains: "Minnesota, however, has not chosen to apply its general sales and use tax to newspapers. Instead, it has created a special tax that applies only to certain publications protected by the First Amendment." Id.
Are you sure that's not applicable? Really, really sure?
Because the way it seems to me is that ICE has not chosen to seize all domain names that are being used for infringement, but only certain ones.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 20 Jun 2011 @ 1:33pm
Re:
Good example why the judicial review policy of Protect IP Act makes sense.
Yes, because judicial rubber stamps stop law enforcement from doing dumb things, like putting a CP notice up on 84,000 sub-domains of a dynamic DNS hosting service.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 20 Jun 2011 @ 12:13pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I do not take something of value from another without compensation.
You write in support of taking works of art and literature away from the public domain. Is that not stealing? Is that not breaking the explicit contract those artists, composers and writers had with the public when the works were created?
I do believe that infringing behavior is both illegal and immoral,
The millions who are freely sharing "copyrighted" content do not agree that it is immoral. As to illegality, I'll agree with Augustine - "An unjust law is no law at all."
What good is a law without the means for enforcement?
What good is a law that cannot be enforced without harming innocents?
My point was that we're talking about entertainment. Not food, not medicine.
And yet we hear the same arguments from the same groups of IP maximalists about both food and medicines when it comes to patents.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 20 Jun 2011 @ 9:35am
Re:
Its wonderful that you actually read and responded to the valid points in the fair use write-up, instead of just insulting the creator of an interesting work of art.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 20 Jun 2011 @ 6:13am
Re:
I'd like to know under what legal theory Twitter has any right to demand that data taken down.
The data was gathered using Twitter's API.
In order to use the API, you must agree to a TOS.
TOS and EULAs are considered contracts, even though no one reads them.
I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I remember, no one's really been willing to decisively challenge or defend click-through and shrink-wrap TOS and EULAs for fear of a judge making a ruling that turns out to be a precedent.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 17 Jun 2011 @ 1:51pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yawn.
I have no direct evidence. But the content industries have no evidence that copyright is required to promote the progress or the creation of new works, nor that this bill will do anything to slow down copyright infringement.
RIAA, MPAA, and BSA "studies" are transparent hyperbole and fear mongering misrepresentations.
The comments here to intelligent observations by ACs read as if they were all written by a 12 year-old.
The wording on this statement is ambiguous. If you mean that the comments made by many Anonymous Cowards read like they were written by pre-pubescent children, I'll agree with you. Notice I'm not an Anonymous Coward. I'm not afraid to give my name and who I represent (no one but myself). I'm clear that I know my position on copyright is not mainstream, and I'm perfectly OK with that. If you want to call me a lunatic, go for it. I feel more like the little kid saying that the emperor is naked.
Judging all of TechDirt by what a few commenters like myself post is either a clear sign that you're afraid Mike is making an impact, that you can't refute his points, or that you are playing some kind of political or PR game and trying to make him look bad by what I say. I could care less about those kind of games - I care about reality. And I think Mike cares enough for free speech that he won't censor me, even if short-sighted people somehow think we're linked (we're not, as I've had maybe 2 or 3 indirect interactions with him in the years I've been reading).
Well, enough of this pissing match. Back to work for me.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 17 Jun 2011 @ 1:26pm
Just like cash
Your BitCoin wallet holding your BitCoins is no different than a physical wallet stuffed with cash. That's made abundantly clear if you read the FAQs on the BitCoin website. If you leave either wallet sitting out in the open (physically or digitally), you're gonna lose it, and recovering cash - good luck with that.
So, if you take precautions with cash, and your online bank account and credit card info, you need to take them with your BitCoins, too. A significant difference between an online bank account and your BitCoins is that you are in 100% control of all the information related to your BitCoins. You don't have to worry that after buying something from a merchant, that they'll save or leak your credit card number and its out in the wild.
Say you mine BitCoins on a Windows box that's connected up to the Internet. When you mine one, it goes to the wallet file on that machine. Get a non-networked Linux box for your "real" wallet, and transfer any mined coins from one to the other.
Josh in CharlotteNC (profile), 17 Jun 2011 @ 11:36am
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Why do you assume the value of a concert video on YouTube is the same as the value of a ticket to the concert? That makes no sense to me.
I don't. But you can bet that copyright owners will, and then they'll go and add ripple effects and make 50 views @ $50 each somehow equal to tens of thousands in damages.
This entire bill doesn't make any sense to me. Neither does all of copyright law. If only laws had to make sense, we'd never need to worry about them.
On the post: Woman Charged With 'Obstructing Governmental Administration' For Filming Police From Her Front Yard
Re: Re: Oh yah
It doesn't matter whether he did it or not. The kid is a minor. He has a right to have his parents/guardians with him during police questioning, and that desire was made clear to the police. Everyone has a right to have an attorney present during questioning, and that desire was made clear as well.
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This is already being done
On the post: Top VCs Tell Congress: PROTECT IP Will Harm Innovation
Re:
The fact that, without an existing trade group, a huge group of them all signed on to and agreed on an open letter to Congress disproves that.
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Re: Re: Re: This is already being done
I thought your first comment was sarcasm, but apparently not. That statement shows how completely clueless you are in regards to current technology and security issues.
I'll take you through an average day of mine and how often I use encryption for legitimate (if not absolutely necessary) reasons.
-Wake up. Blah.
-Check email/social media. Each login is a secure, encrypted authentication.(1)
-Shower. Listen to Pandora on my phone using my encrypted(2) wifi.
-Drive to work.
-Boot up my work laptop. Log in to the hard drive full disk encryption before even the operating system loads.(3)
-Start up Outlook for email. I have a digital signature - a form of public key/private key encryption.(4)
-Do work. Just FYI, I work in the Cryptographic Services group at a major bank. I'm on a project that involves deploying hard drive encryption to unencrypted machines - something which the federal regulators have insisted on as a result of BigBank1 buying BigBank2 (who went under during the financial mess 2 years ago).
-Transfer files using secure FTP(5) to vendor to assist in diagnosing issue.
-Leave work. Stop somewhere for food on the way home. Use their free wifi. Login to my work VPN(6) and finish up work stuff.
-Get home.
-Login to a game or two.(7)
-Perform some unauthorized copyright infringement using BitTorrent just for kicks.
So, encryption has:
-Kept my logins secure (1)(7)
-Prevented unauthorized access to my internet connection to stop evil dirty pirates from using it (2)
-Kept the contents of my hard drive secure, which can include sensitive corporate information (3)
-Verified my identity to coworkers and vendors (4)
-Safely allowed transfer for sensitive data over the internet.(5)
-Prevented wifi eavesdropping on a public network (6)
So if you bank with BigBank1 or BigBank2(now a part of BigBank1), you can thank me by keeping your information secure with encryption. if you're not a customer of one of these banks, you better hope your bank is using encryption.
On the post: Why ISPs Becoming Hollywood Enforcers Won't Actually Solve Hollywood's Problem
Re: Re: Let's see how this scenario plays out:
Yeah, that has really worked for spam. /sarc
On the post: Sign Of The Times: Guy Updates Facebook Status During Police Standoff
Re: Facebook should be sued and/or shutdown
If pointing out something that's happening in public is illegal, then wouldn't the TV news crews that show up and usually broadcast live during similar situations also be illegal? Police can, and regularly do, move people and press out of the area for this and other reasons - why not this time?
I haven't made up my mind on it exactly, but I think a snap decision without knowing all the facts as to what was going on isn't a good idea.
On the post: New Filing Explains How Domain Seizures Violate The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Are you sure that's not applicable? Really, really sure?
Because the way it seems to me is that ICE has not chosen to seize all domain names that are being used for infringement, but only certain ones.
On the post: MPAA Directly Lobbies Law Enforcement To Be Its Own Private Police Force
Re: Re: Re: Re: calling the cops is not "lobbying"
So where did the $400,000 go?
On the post: Sony Continues Suing People Who Help Others Modify Their PS3s
Re: Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Universal Music Goes To War Against Popular Hip Hop Sites & Blogs
Re:
Yes, because judicial rubber stamps stop law enforcement from doing dumb things, like putting a CP notice up on 84,000 sub-domains of a dynamic DNS hosting service.
http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110215/01092813096/did-homeland-security-seize-then-u nseize-dynamic-dns-domain.shtml
Oh, wait.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You write in support of taking works of art and literature away from the public domain. Is that not stealing? Is that not breaking the explicit contract those artists, composers and writers had with the public when the works were created?
I do believe that infringing behavior is both illegal and immoral,
The millions who are freely sharing "copyrighted" content do not agree that it is immoral. As to illegality, I'll agree with Augustine - "An unjust law is no law at all."
What good is a law without the means for enforcement?
What good is a law that cannot be enforced without harming innocents?
My point was that we're talking about entertainment. Not food, not medicine.
And yet we hear the same arguments from the same groups of IP maximalists about both food and medicines when it comes to patents.
Intellectual Property does, in fact, kill people.
On the post: Peanuts Rights Holder Shuts Down Peanutweeter, Pisses Off Fans For No Reason At All
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Peanuts Rights Holder Shuts Down Peanutweeter, Pisses Off Fans For No Reason At All
Re:
/s
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Re: Re:
And yet, the recording industry will still be losing money.
How's that for pithy?
On the post: Twitter Wishes 4.5 Million Osama Bin Laden-Related Tweets Into Their API Cornfield
Re:
The data was gathered using Twitter's API.
In order to use the API, you must agree to a TOS.
TOS and EULAs are considered contracts, even though no one reads them.
I'm not a lawyer, but as far as I remember, no one's really been willing to decisively challenge or defend click-through and shrink-wrap TOS and EULAs for fear of a judge making a ruling that turns out to be a precedent.
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I have no direct evidence. But the content industries have no evidence that copyright is required to promote the progress or the creation of new works, nor that this bill will do anything to slow down copyright infringement.
RIAA, MPAA, and BSA "studies" are transparent hyperbole and fear mongering misrepresentations.
The comments here to intelligent observations by ACs read as if they were all written by a 12 year-old.
The wording on this statement is ambiguous. If you mean that the comments made by many Anonymous Cowards read like they were written by pre-pubescent children, I'll agree with you. Notice I'm not an Anonymous Coward. I'm not afraid to give my name and who I represent (no one but myself). I'm clear that I know my position on copyright is not mainstream, and I'm perfectly OK with that. If you want to call me a lunatic, go for it. I feel more like the little kid saying that the emperor is naked.
Judging all of TechDirt by what a few commenters like myself post is either a clear sign that you're afraid Mike is making an impact, that you can't refute his points, or that you are playing some kind of political or PR game and trying to make him look bad by what I say. I could care less about those kind of games - I care about reality. And I think Mike cares enough for free speech that he won't censor me, even if short-sighted people somehow think we're linked (we're not, as I've had maybe 2 or 3 indirect interactions with him in the years I've been reading).
Well, enough of this pissing match. Back to work for me.
On the post: New Malware Targets Bitcoins To Steal
Just like cash
So, if you take precautions with cash, and your online bank account and credit card info, you need to take them with your BitCoins, too. A significant difference between an online bank account and your BitCoins is that you are in 100% control of all the information related to your BitCoins. You don't have to worry that after buying something from a merchant, that they'll save or leak your credit card number and its out in the wild.
Say you mine BitCoins on a Windows box that's connected up to the Internet. When you mine one, it goes to the wallet file on that machine. Get a non-networked Linux box for your "real" wallet, and transfer any mined coins from one to the other.
On the post: Senators Unconcerned About Massive Unintended Consequences Of Criminalizing People For Embedding YouTube Videos
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I don't. But you can bet that copyright owners will, and then they'll go and add ripple effects and make 50 views @ $50 each somehow equal to tens of thousands in damages.
This entire bill doesn't make any sense to me. Neither does all of copyright law. If only laws had to make sense, we'd never need to worry about them.
Next >>