It all depends on where you want internet service. Being able to get high speed internet at any point on the Earth's surface can be a dream come true. Suppose you live in Antarctica where you might get 100 kbps max, intermittently.
Imagine the use of this for ships on the ocean. In the remotest deserts. Remotest mountain tops. Secret equipment smuggled in to 'bad'™ countries.
CenturyLink DSL speed that I can get here: 10Mbs. . . . one of CenturyLink's switching facilities can be seen from where I live . . . I always laugh when I periodically check to see what speeds are available to me.
location data generated by apps popular with the world's Muslims
That was last year.
Now that it is clear we have extremist domestic terrorists who would overthrow the US government in order to prevent congress from doing one of its basic constitutional duties, and in order to save us all from democracy, maybe they should target apps like Frank, Parler, Conservapedia and Trump's blog.
It is 2021. How can you even suggest that people should be liable for the consequences of their own dangerous actions?!?
If companies were not liable, then how would people get a big payday if they get injured or dead from, say, the 'Tide Pod Challenge'?
Or consider Duracell. They put a bitter coating on their button cell batteries to stop small children from putting them in their mouths. Good for Duracell. But what is Duracell going to do to protect Millennials? Millennials will see the bitter taste of button cell batteries as another 'challenge' to see who can swallow the most button cell batteries. What is Duracell going to do for them? So shouldn't they be liable.
And that brings us back to Snapchat. What about other GPS devices (not just apps) that can tell you how fast you are moving. Shouldn't they take responsibility to protect everyone from using the device to see how fast they can manage to get their vehicle to move? And shouldn't GPS device makers be responsible for if people are not looking at the road instead of their GPS device?
If you buy a new vacuum cleaner, shouldn't it have a major warning sign not to use it in the swimming pool?
How do you expect people to be able to get lawsuit jackpots from doing stupid things? Imagine all of the YouTube videos that will never get made showing people doing these things!
Bliss could tell the court that his credible legal theory is to increase CNN's litigation costs! That would work! It would send a strong message to the court and get the court's attention.
Bliss: if you're reading this, DON'T actually do this.
Or, change the laws so that platforms can decide what they are willing to host and what they are not willing to host.
If you want to say something so bad that nobody will host it, you can always build your own platform. That's the beauty of the internet. All you need is a connection to get started.
Oh, don't want to build your own platform? But you want other people to build it for you, and let you do anything you want on their property?
I was shocked and appalled to discover that sites such at Twitter and Facebook can block certain speech. They may even ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as medical misinformation. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to prevent sites such as Twitter and Facebook from blocking any speech of any kind whatsoever. In the interest of free speech! Anything that can be stated in UTF-8 should be fair game to be posted for all to enjoy. In the interest of free speech!
I was also shocked and appalled to discover that sites such as Parler, Frank and Conservapedia are not being allowed to block certain speech. They should be allowed to ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as making inconvenient statements of fact, liberal ideas, or taking Our Lord's name in vein. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to allow sites such as Parler and Frank to block speech and cancel accounts of people who desecrate their sacred pages or take our Lord's name in vane. In the interest of free speech!
I don't usually ask you to introduce two new laws in the same letter. So thank you for your patients and consideration in this matter.
I was shocked and appalled to discover that sites such at Twitter and Facebook can block certain speech. They may even ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as medical misinformation. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to prevent sites such as Twitter and Facebook from blocking any speech of any kind whatsoever. In the interest of free speech! Anything that can be stated in UTF-8 should be fair game to be posted for all to enjoy. In the interest of free speech!
I was also shocked and appalled to discover that sites such as Parler, Frank and Conservapedia are not being allowed to block certain speech. They should be allowed to ban an account for merely exercising free speach. Such as making inconvenient statements of fact, liberal ideas, or taking Our Lord's name in vein. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to allow sites such as Parler and Frank to block speech and cancel accounts of people who desecrate they're sacred pages or take our Lord's name in vane. In the goodest interest of free speech!
I don't usually ask you to introduce two new laws in the same letter. So thank you for your patients and consideration in this matter.
As long as it put competitor out of business, it's a success!
In 1982, my then boss told me a story about one of the many monopolist tactics.
Xerox had designed this new office copier. Another large business machines company who knew nothing about copiers got one, took it apart, designed their own based on it. On the strength of their huge sales force who already had established contacts with large numbers of business customers, they were able to sell their own cloned copier and take bulk of the market.
Xerox sues (patent infringement would be my guess). Xerox wins. Judgement $100 Million. Cheap at the price for the big business machines company who now had the market, and one more line of income servicing these machines they had just sold.
So I'm sure Charter is delighted at a mere $19 Million fine if it puts their competitor out of business.
YouTube should require identification of two parties: (1) the copyright owner, (2) the party who is requesting the takedown.
Those parties should be disclosed to whoever posted the YT video which is being taken down.
It is only fair that the person being falsely accused of copyright infringement be able to identify (and possibly sue) whoever is falsely accusing them.
Why are they not also amping up weapons capabilities on these drones?
No police departments should have killer robot drones. We should keep killer robot drones safely in the hands of the government for our protection.
All government agencies (I'm looking at you department of interior, and HHS) need to have killer robot drones -- just in case any other government department would decide to make use of killer robot drones.
I bet those state laws don't restrict the use of Starlink.
It would be fun to see them try.
How much more brazen could they be that they want to prevent any competition.
In the medium size city where I live, a friend told me he was informed Starlink service is now officially available here. I don't intend to get it, unless things change drastically, but it's nice to have a third option. Some people don't even have that many options.
On the post: As The US Press Withers, Glorified Marketing Aims To Take Its Place
We don't need the press
Why would we need the press if we can have The Minisitery of Truth! ?
On the post: Elon Musk Makes It Clear Starlink Won't Have The Capacity To Disrupt U.S. Broadband
Re:
It all depends on where you want internet service. Being able to get high speed internet at any point on the Earth's surface can be a dream come true. Suppose you live in Antarctica where you might get 100 kbps max, intermittently.
Imagine the use of this for ships on the ocean. In the remotest deserts. Remotest mountain tops. Secret equipment smuggled in to 'bad'™ countries.
On the post: Elon Musk Makes It Clear Starlink Won't Have The Capacity To Disrupt U.S. Broadband
Re:
Good for you! I would always cry.
On the post: Defense Department Is Buying Domestic Internet Metadata From Data Brokers
Wrong target
That was last year.
Now that it is clear we have extremist domestic terrorists who would overthrow the US government in order to prevent congress from doing one of its basic constitutional duties, and in order to save us all from democracy, maybe they should target apps like Frank, Parler, Conservapedia and Trump's blog.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re: Re: Re:
We also need warnings on fan belts to warn people to turn off the engine before replacing the fan belt.
On the post: Appeals Court Says Families Of Car Crash Victims Can Continue To Sue Snapchat Over Its 'Speed Filter'
Re:
It is 2021. How can you even suggest that people should be liable for the consequences of their own dangerous actions?!?
If companies were not liable, then how would people get a big payday if they get injured or dead from, say, the 'Tide Pod Challenge'?
Or consider Duracell. They put a bitter coating on their button cell batteries to stop small children from putting them in their mouths. Good for Duracell. But what is Duracell going to do to protect Millennials? Millennials will see the bitter taste of button cell batteries as another 'challenge' to see who can swallow the most button cell batteries. What is Duracell going to do for them? So shouldn't they be liable.
And that brings us back to Snapchat. What about other GPS devices (not just apps) that can tell you how fast you are moving. Shouldn't they take responsibility to protect everyone from using the device to see how fast they can manage to get their vehicle to move? And shouldn't GPS device makers be responsible for if people are not looking at the road instead of their GPS device?
If you buy a new vacuum cleaner, shouldn't it have a major warning sign not to use it in the swimming pool?
How do you expect people to be able to get lawsuit jackpots from doing stupid things? Imagine all of the YouTube videos that will never get made showing people doing these things!
Oh the humanity!
On the post: Devin Nunes' Favorite Lawyer On The Hook For Over $20k In Sanctions
An idea!
Bliss could tell the court that his credible legal theory is to increase CNN's litigation costs! That would work! It would send a strong message to the court and get the court's attention.
Bliss: if you're reading this, DON'T actually do this.
On the post: What If The Media And Politicians Tried To Hold A Techlash... And No One Joined Them
Re: Re: Dear Senator
Or, change the laws so that platforms can decide what they are willing to host and what they are not willing to host.
If you want to say something so bad that nobody will host it, you can always build your own platform. That's the beauty of the internet. All you need is a connection to get started.
Oh, don't want to build your own platform? But you want other people to build it for you, and let you do anything you want on their property?
On the post: The Oversight Board's Decision On Facebook's Trump Ban Is Just Not That Important
Dear Senator
Dear Senator:
I was shocked and appalled to discover that sites such at Twitter and Facebook can block certain speech. They may even ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as medical misinformation. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to prevent sites such as Twitter and Facebook from blocking any speech of any kind whatsoever. In the interest of free speech! Anything that can be stated in UTF-8 should be fair game to be posted for all to enjoy. In the interest of free speech!
I was also shocked and appalled to discover that sites such as Parler, Frank and Conservapedia are not being allowed to block certain speech. They should be allowed to ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as making inconvenient statements of fact, liberal ideas, or taking Our Lord's name in vein. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to allow sites such as Parler and Frank to block speech and cancel accounts of people who desecrate their sacred pages or take our Lord's name in vane. In the interest of free speech!
I don't usually ask you to introduce two new laws in the same letter. So thank you for your patients and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your constituent
On the post: What If The Media And Politicians Tried To Hold A Techlash... And No One Joined Them
Dear Senator
Dear Senator:
I was shocked and appalled to discover that sites such at Twitter and Facebook can block certain speech. They may even ban an account for merely exercising free speech. Such as medical misinformation. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to prevent sites such as Twitter and Facebook from blocking any speech of any kind whatsoever. In the interest of free speech! Anything that can be stated in UTF-8 should be fair game to be posted for all to enjoy. In the interest of free speech!
I was also shocked and appalled to discover that sites such as Parler, Frank and Conservapedia are not being allowed to block certain speech. They should be allowed to ban an account for merely exercising free speach. Such as making inconvenient statements of fact, liberal ideas, or taking Our Lord's name in vein. I therefore urge you to immediately introduce new legislation to allow sites such as Parler and Frank to block speech and cancel accounts of people who desecrate they're sacred pages or take our Lord's name in vane. In the goodest interest of free speech!
I don't usually ask you to introduce two new laws in the same letter. So thank you for your patients and consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Your constituent
On the post: Cable Giant Charter Fined $19 Million For Lying About Competitors Going Out Of Business
Re: Re: As long as it put competitor out of business, it's a suc
I could be mis-remembering the year by a couple years. I remember hearing the story. It is possible the story is not true.
On the post: Cable Giant Charter Fined $19 Million For Lying About Competitors Going Out Of Business
As long as it put competitor out of business, it's a success!
In 1982, my then boss told me a story about one of the many monopolist tactics.
Xerox had designed this new office copier. Another large business machines company who knew nothing about copiers got one, took it apart, designed their own based on it. On the strength of their huge sales force who already had established contacts with large numbers of business customers, they were able to sell their own cloned copier and take bulk of the market.
Xerox sues (patent infringement would be my guess). Xerox wins. Judgement $100 Million. Cheap at the price for the big business machines company who now had the market, and one more line of income servicing these machines they had just sold.
So I'm sure Charter is delighted at a mere $19 Million fine if it puts their competitor out of business.
(Hope I remembered the key details correctly.)
On the post: Wall Street Analysts Say Musk's Starlink Poses No Real Threat To Traditional Broadband
Yeah, right
Just give it time. Starlink will gradually build up their constellation to ten times the size it presently is.
Maybe they will even seek permission to enlarge it further.
Then one day -- OMG, Starlink suddenly is a threat to traditional broadband.
People once thought you could never land or re-use a rocket. Now people are only amazed when SpaceX FAILS to successfully land a booster.
Fortunately, no states, thus far, require Starlink to be sold through a "dealer network".
On the post: Content Moderation Case Study: NASA Footage Taken Down By YouTube Moderation (2012)
Something YouTube should require
YouTube should require identification of two parties: (1) the copyright owner, (2) the party who is requesting the takedown.
Those parties should be disclosed to whoever posted the YT video which is being taken down.
It is only fair that the person being falsely accused of copyright infringement be able to identify (and possibly sue) whoever is falsely accusing them.
On the post: Drone Manufacturers Are Amping Up Surveillance Capabilities In Response To Demand From Government Agencies
Why only surveillance?
Why are they not also amping up weapons capabilities on these drones?
No police departments should have killer robot drones. We should keep killer robot drones safely in the hands of the government for our protection.
All government agencies (I'm looking at you department of interior, and HHS) need to have killer robot drones -- just in case any other government department would decide to make use of killer robot drones.
On the post: DMCA Complaint Claims Copyright On The Word 'Outstanding', Wants Entries From Top Dictionaries De-Listed From Google
Did they register their copyright ownership?
When did this party create the word Outstanding?
Was the word Outstanding created prior to 1910?
Did they register their copyright ownership?
(the only way to make this insanity stop is to play that "penalty of perjury" card, and sue for damages -- however minimal, and costs.)
On the post: Twitter Opposes 'Tweet' Trademark Application For Bird Food Company
Tirade Mark opposition
If there is a tirade mark that Twitter should be opposed to it would be for the tirade mark: Twit
On the post: State Laws Restricting Community Broadband Are Hurting US Communities During The Pandemic
Re: Re: Starlink
They will pass laws requiring Starlink to be sold through a dealer network.
On the post: State Laws Restricting Community Broadband Are Hurting US Communities During The Pandemic
Starlink
I bet those state laws don't restrict the use of Starlink.
It would be fun to see them try.
How much more brazen could they be that they want to prevent any competition.
In the medium size city where I live, a friend told me he was informed Starlink service is now officially available here. I don't intend to get it, unless things change drastically, but it's nice to have a third option. Some people don't even have that many options.
On the post: Chastity Penis Lock Company That Was Hacked Says It's Now Totally Safe To Put Your Penis Back In That Chastity Lock
This uses a Proprietary API
Because this device uses a Proprietary API, there is still a concern about Vendor Lock In.
Next >>