Aaron - I agree with you. My comments were aimed at That One Guy, but because of the how the comment system here works, my post came after yours, not his.
The story, as characterized, is not quite accurate.
First - there is no "disclosing" of journalistic sources. The series that was published gave the source, so there's no secret. The stories were based on recorded interviews conducted by Makuch by NAMED SOURCES. There's no secret there to be protected. What the government wanted was access to the recordings themselves to see what else was in there.
Essentially, the court said "You've already told us who your sources are, so there's no secret to be kept. You've already reported based on the disclosed interviews, so there's no secret to be kept there, either"
Do I think it's bad form, on general principals? Yes, absolutely. But it's not what it's been made out to be, and will have exactly zero effect on any similar case where the identity of the sources are secret.
Re: Re: Re: "And we should trust you THIS time why again?"
So you approve of thugs throwing a hood over your face and kidnapping you until you turn over X?
That is what happened here.
How is that any different from what you lot do when you jail somebody forever for contempt of court until they are willing to turn over the password for their phone when they haven't been convicted for anything, regardless of the severity of their alleged crime?
"record-setting pace for electronic searches of individuals it can even identify" should be "record-setting pace for electronic searches of individuals it can't even identify", maybe?
Population density of NYC, for example, is 27,000/sq mile. So in .17 square miles you have 4,590 - assuming nobody moves. Since people DO move, and the time frame is +-15 minutes, you could easily double or triple that.
Now if YOU think that grabbing data on potentially 10,000-15,000 people is no big deal .............
There is nothing in there that comes anywhere close to amounting to defamation under US law.
That may be the case, but it happened in Canada, and the lawsuit is in Canada - so American law really doesn't matter, does it?
But the large point remains: suing for defamation is suing to silence someone.
Do you honestly believe that? I believe in free speech, but how is that belief in conflict with me not wanting you to (possibly) ruin my reputation or my livelihood because you decided to publish articles saying that I enjoyed drowning kitten, drop-kicked puppies for enjoyment, and had a penchant for making stir-fried unicorn?
Now for the record - I think the lawsuit is baseless, stupid beyond belief and does nothing but give his opponents ammunition. But I seriously think you've gone overboard and lost it a bit with this one.
I think leos, and many others, conflate the word respect with the words adulation and reverence. When they demand respect, what they really want is adulation but they will not admit it.
It's worse than that. Cops spend too much time around criminals ..... and amongst the street/criminal element, "respect" means "submission"
It's a Potemkin Village that law enforcement types will parade around for the next couple of years insisting that backdoors can be made safely, even though Ozzie's plan is not safe at all.
Even worse, it's a Potemkin Village without any doors - just big gaping holes where the entrances should be
I'm sorry, but from what's in the article, I really don't see how you can say Down N Out is paying homage to In N Out. In N Out is one thing - it implies speed, and quickness. Down N Out implies something else entirely. Other than the N in the middle, I don't see how you could possibly claim they're related at all.
I'm a bit surprised there's been no mention of nexusmods.com. They host mods for over 500 different games, and have literally millions of mods on site. The only things these mods have in common? They've been created by people for the love of the game, and shared so others can enjoy them as well.
Some of the mod authors have links to patreon, etc - must do not. It's creativity for creativify's sake.
I can't think of a better example of people creating things where money is not even a factor.
Re: Re: violation of agreements between journals and authors
By your own text these publishers are doing some work;
you wrote: "and then add some editorial polish at the end." -- You clearly need some "editorial polish" to not write so stupidly as to in same sentence invalidate your own assertions.
Because some guy at the carwash polishes my car after it's been cleaned does NOT mean he should get paid for having made the car in the first place.
If I run a story containing a big picture of a cow while the accompanying text talks about unicorns, the cow does not automagically become a unicorn.
Now - given the point made by AC about people under 30 just before your comment - if you want to argue that whoever did that graphic *thought* they were crosshairs and used it accordingly ..... you might have a point.
But it doesn't change the fact that a rose is a rose is a rose.
The worst part of all this is that what was on the map were NOT crosshairs of any sort - it was a compass rose (that little round thingie on allmost all maps that show you where north, south, east & west are).
Kinda like saying that giving somebody the middle finger is a threat because you've got a stylised gun.
Third world nations are happy enough buying half-century old Soviet-era tanks for their growing armies, and prices for T-72 and T-80s in the world market are held down by the fierce competition from former communist-block countries such as Ukraine and Poland which make copies of these Russian designed tanks, completely unlicensed and royalty-free, often undercutting the "official" Russian-built ones on price.
Not true. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, per agreement, countries were specifrically given ownership of whatever assests were physically in their country, with the exception of the nuclear forces. They wern't making "copies" at all - they were making the real thing.
Also, the tank designs you refer to - (same for the M-1) - are continiously updated. Basically, the only thing a modern T-72 has in common with one from the Soviet era is the frame.
On the post: Canada Rejects A Free Press: Supreme Court Says Journalist Must Hand Over Sources
Re:
On the post: Canada Rejects A Free Press: Supreme Court Says Journalist Must Hand Over Sources
Re: Re: Close, but not quite
Second - you'll note that already said it was bad form and didn't like it.
Third - my criticism of the case was in it's characterization. There was no forced disclosure of secret sources, because they were ALREADY KNOWN.
On the post: Canada Rejects A Free Press: Supreme Court Says Journalist Must Hand Over Sources
Close, but not quite
First - there is no "disclosing" of journalistic sources. The series that was published gave the source, so there's no secret. The stories were based on recorded interviews conducted by Makuch by NAMED SOURCES. There's no secret there to be protected. What the government wanted was access to the recordings themselves to see what else was in there.
Essentially, the court said "You've already told us who your sources are, so there's no secret to be kept. You've already reported based on the disclosed interviews, so there's no secret to be kept there, either"
Do I think it's bad form, on general principals? Yes, absolutely. But it's not what it's been made out to be, and will have exactly zero effect on any similar case where the identity of the sources are secret.
On the post: To Obtain Documents About Facebook Data-Sharing, UK Gov't Seizes And Detains A US Executive Working For A Different Company
Re: Re: Re: "And we should trust you THIS time why again?"
How is that any different from what you lot do when you jail somebody forever for contempt of court until they are willing to turn over the password for their phone when they haven't been convicted for anything, regardless of the severity of their alleged crime?
On the post: EFF Sues California Law Enforcement Agency For Refusing To Hand Over Stingray Documents
On the post: FBI Tried To Get Google To Turn Over Identifying Info On Hundreds Of Phone Owners
Re: from the sensationalism dept.
Now if YOU think that grabbing data on potentially 10,000-15,000 people is no big deal .............
On the post: Supposed 'Free Speech' Warrior Jordan Peterson Sues University Because Silly Professor Said Some Mean Things About Him
Re: Re:
That may be the case, but it happened in Canada, and the lawsuit is in Canada - so American law really doesn't matter, does it?
Do you honestly believe that? I believe in free speech, but how is that belief in conflict with me not wanting you to (possibly) ruin my reputation or my livelihood because you decided to publish articles saying that I enjoyed drowning kitten, drop-kicked puppies for enjoyment, and had a penchant for making stir-fried unicorn?
Now for the record - I think the lawsuit is baseless, stupid beyond belief and does nothing but give his opponents ammunition. But I seriously think you've gone overboard and lost it a bit with this one.
On the post: Cops Follow Up Officer-Involved Shooting By Heading To Funeral Home To Apply Dead Man's Fingers To His Locked Phone
Re: Re:
It's worse than that. Cops spend too much time around criminals ..... and amongst the street/criminal element, "respect" means "submission"
On the post: Software Legend Ray Ozzie Thinks He Can Safely Backdoor Encryption; He's Very Wrong
Potemkin Village
Even worse, it's a Potemkin Village without any doors - just big gaping holes where the entrances should be
On the post: In 'N Out Uses A Bullshit Pop-Up Every Five Years Strategy Just To Lock Up Its Australian Trademark
Re: Re: Homage?
On the post: In 'N Out Uses A Bullshit Pop-Up Every Five Years Strategy Just To Lock Up Its Australian Trademark
Homage?
On the post: Singaporean Government Creates Fake News To Push Fake News Legislation
Actually the second part is usually not good advice. Quite often one side is wholly wrong - and often not the side you might have initially expected.
Really? So please, tell me - how do you possibly know which side is the "wholly wrong" one, if you only hear one side of the story?
On the post: Everyone Creates: New Empirical Data Shows Just How Much The Internet Has Enabled A New Creative Economy
It's not all about money
Some of the mod authors have links to patreon, etc - must do not. It's creativity for creativify's sake.
I can't think of a better example of people creating things where money is not even a factor.
On the post: Hacker Lauri Love Wins Extradition Appeal; Won't Be Shipped Off To The US
Re:
On the post: Hacker Lauri Love Wins Extradition Appeal; Won't Be Shipped Off To The US
Re: Re: OR it could promote hordes of foreign hackers to hijack YOUR computer.
On the post: New 'Coalition For Responsible Sharing' About To Send Millions Of Take-Down Notices To Stop Researchers Sharing Their Own Papers
Re: Re: violation of agreements between journals and authors
Because some guy at the carwash polishes my car after it's been cleaned does NOT mean he should get paid for having made the car in the first place.
On the post: Judge Tosses Sarah Palin's Defamation Suit Against The New York Times, Says No Actual Malice
Re: Re: Re: Re: Stylised Crosshairs ?
I'd call Plain a tool, but tools are useful.
On the post: Judge Tosses Sarah Palin's Defamation Suit Against The New York Times, Says No Actual Malice
Re: Re: Stylised Crosshairs ?
Now - given the point made by AC about people under 30 just before your comment - if you want to argue that whoever did that graphic *thought* they were crosshairs and used it accordingly ..... you might have a point.
But it doesn't change the fact that a rose is a rose is a rose.
On the post: Judge Tosses Sarah Palin's Defamation Suit Against The New York Times, Says No Actual Malice
Stylised Crosshairs ?
Kinda like saying that giving somebody the middle finger is a threat because you've got a stylised gun.
On the post: White House Plan To Reduce Drug Prices... Is To EXTEND Patents?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not true. After the breakup of the Soviet Union, per agreement, countries were specifrically given ownership of whatever assests were physically in their country, with the exception of the nuclear forces. They wern't making "copies" at all - they were making the real thing.
Also, the tank designs you refer to - (same for the M-1) - are continiously updated. Basically, the only thing a modern T-72 has in common with one from the Soviet era is the frame.
Next >>