>It would eventually win of course — and as a result, fuel the innovation that gave rise to P2P sharing and torrents. Mission accomplished!
LOL!
Torrents seem to be dying out though. Or maybe I'm just out of the loop on where the good ones are hiding. I can still find (normally new episodes of various shows [I use the files for video editing]) what I'm looking for but the swarms are smaller than they were and they tend to die off faster.
CNN is down to having one comment thread a day. And most of the time its only open for six hours.
OTOH, very seldom do I find reasoned, intelligent discussion within CNN's comment threads so I don't consider this to be any loss.
In fact I very seldom see well-reasoned intelligent conversation in the comments of a story at any general news site. Most of the time, regardless of what is being reported, comments will devolve into the same old unwinnable debates about Politics and Religion.
So I can see where Reuters is coming from. I don't think I will miss the comments there either.
What you are writing about is really nothing new. Metrics have driven journalism throughout the history of the industry. Before there were pageviews, there were Neilson Ratings and circulation numbers. What we now call comments used to be referred to as "Letters to the Editor".
Conflict and breathless coverage of non-issues have long dominated the headlines. The real problem with today's media coverage is that there is no room or time for anything but headlines. Stories that would have run on the inside pages of a newspaper are now ignored because they aren't worthy of the homepage and there is no where else to put them.
I think Carreon might even exceed Prenda. Not sure that Prenda exceeds Roca though. Prenda's incompetance is deeper, wider, and crazier. The fact that they are *still digging* after the 7th circuit ruled against them is indicative of that.
IIRC, tax exemption status was granted after quite a few Scientologists filed lawsuits against the IRS. The courts and government gave them tax-exemption just to shut them up.
In fairness, which I find difficult, database stuff doesn't have file properties as you are used to thinking of them. Yes there would be a "date collected" property but if I was building this infrastructure I would also input a hard-coded fail-safe that would throw up all sorts of alarms if that field was modified.
This case is not being fought on a level playing field. Justice is not blind where the NSA is concerned nor are the courts independent and impartial. They are run by the federal government which also runs the NSA.
That's called a conflict of interest and our government is long past the days where it would go out of its way to avoid taking advantage of such things.
I'd of been shocked if the ruling had gone the other way.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
>No, you don't get it. You might as well keep your mouth shut, >because what ever you say can be twisted and used against >you. Nothing you can say will help you, so the less you say, >the better.
And silence can't be used against me?
Let me give you a little bit more details about the "safety stop"s. They are already set up when I get there. Every car is stopped and every driver is questioned. Even at 3 in the morning there can be a line. There wasn't a line at this stop (when I got there) which is probably why I got more attention than I had received the week before. But although the cop may have been bored, the answers I gave and the way I gave them made me too boring to be worth his while.
I didn't find any mention of Judge Howell in the ruling; has there been any public mention of censure or other penalties for the judge not recusing himself from the case?
>I'm having trouble at classifying this soap-opera. > At times it looks like some reboot of the Three Stooges but now it's looking like some sort of Homeric Tragedy!
I believe the word you are looking for is 'farce'.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
Under your logic it doesn't matter what I say, and since my name, address and place of employment can be easily verified (or determined) by items already in my possession I might as well be honest.
Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
>Worse yet, the officer's *interpretation* of what you said is what becomes official. If he mishears you or misrepresents your speech, you are liable for whatever he says you said.
>In order to ensure that you can call the cop a liar about anything he *mistakenly* says you said, practice the following sentences until they are automatic.
>1) On advice of counsel, I do not answer questions, and I do not consent to searches.
>2) Am I being detained, or am I free to go?
And these things can't be misinterpreted or "misheard"?
I get that you don't want to shoot the breeze with your friendly patrol officer but answering the basic question in the simplest manner possible isn't a bad idea either.
Example: I got caught in two "safety" stops last month. When you work the night shift in a not-good part of town such things are a fact of life.
Here's how they went down: Cop approaches, looks at my car through the windows and asks to see my ID. I hand it to him. He asks, "Do you still live at [address]."
Good answer: "Yes." Bad answer: "On the advice of counsel, I do not answer questions and I do not consent to searches."
Then he asks, "Are you headed to or from work?" Good answer: "From work." Bad answer: "On the advice of counsel, I do not answer questions and I do not consent to searches."
Then he asks, "Where do you work?" Good answer: [place of employment] Bad answer: "Am I being detained or am I free to go?"
End result is the same either way but if you give my bad answers the cop is going to remember you, run your plate and maybe find something you'd rather not have come up. He may also put a note in the database next to your plate number, "Individual acted suspiciously at routine safety stop."
These days it takes more than hard work to get ahead. It takes luck, a willingness to take a chance, or someone has cut you a break.
Most jobs that don't require a college degree also don't pay enough for a person to go to college. Heck, you're lucky if you can make enough to get by without a second job.
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: November 16th - 22nd
LOL!
Torrents seem to be dying out though. Or maybe I'm just out of the loop on where the good ones are hiding. I can still find (normally new episodes of various shows [I use the files for video editing]) what I'm looking for but the swarms are smaller than they were and they tend to die off faster.
On the post: Reuters, Re/code Care So Very Much About 'Conversation' That They're Asking Commenters To Leave
OTOH, very seldom do I find reasoned, intelligent discussion within CNN's comment threads so I don't consider this to be any loss.
In fact I very seldom see well-reasoned intelligent conversation in the comments of a story at any general news site. Most of the time, regardless of what is being reported, comments will devolve into the same old unwinnable debates about Politics and Religion.
So I can see where Reuters is coming from. I don't think I will miss the comments there either.
On the post: This Post Is Not About GamerGate
A Historical Perspective
Conflict and breathless coverage of non-issues have long dominated the headlines. The real problem with today's media coverage is that there is no room or time for anything but headlines. Stories that would have run on the inside pages of a newspaper are now ignored because they aren't worthy of the homepage and there is no where else to put them.
On the post: This Post Is Not About GamerGate
In other words...
On the post: Roca Labs Story Gets More Bizarre: Senator Threatens Bogus Defamation Lawsuit, While Nevada Quickly Rejects Bogus Bribery Charge
Re: Re: Re:
Not that I'm paying any attention either.
On the post: Roca Labs Story Gets More Bizarre: Senator Threatens Bogus Defamation Lawsuit, While Nevada Quickly Rejects Bogus Bribery Charge
Re: Re: Re:
Prenda may be nuts but Carreon is batshit insane.
On the post: New Snowden Doc Reveals How GCHQ/NSA Use The Internet To 'Manipulate, Deceive And Destroy Reputations'
Re: Re: Re: Re: (Scientology)
On the post: Judge Says NSA Can Continue To Destroy Evidence
Re: How do we know?
On the post: Judge Says NSA Can Continue To Destroy Evidence
Surprised? I'm not.
That's called a conflict of interest and our government is long past the days where it would go out of its way to avoid taking advantage of such things.
I'd of been shocked if the ruling had gone the other way.
On the post: One Single Porn Copyright Troll, Malibu Media, Accounted For Nearly 40% Of All Copyright Lawsuits This Year
Re: Re: missing stats
On the post: Another Bogus Hit From A License Plate Reader Results In Another Citizen Surrounded By Cops With Guns Out
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
>because what ever you say can be twisted and used against
>you. Nothing you can say will help you, so the less you say,
>the better.
And silence can't be used against me?
Let me give you a little bit more details about the "safety stop"s. They are already set up when I get there. Every car is stopped and every driver is questioned. Even at 3 in the morning there can be a line. There wasn't a line at this stop (when I got there) which is probably why I got more attention than I had received the week before. But although the cop may have been bored, the answers I gave and the way I gave them made me too boring to be worth his while.
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Prenda Win From Former RIAA Lobbyist Judge
So, Mr. Steele, where are you living these days?
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Prenda Win From Former RIAA Lobbyist Judge
Re: Scare quotes FTW
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Prenda Win From Former RIAA Lobbyist Judge
Re:
Herself, and no.
On the post: Appeals Court Overturns Prenda Win From Former RIAA Lobbyist Judge
Re:
> At times it looks like some reboot of the Three Stooges but now it's looking like some sort of Homeric Tragedy!
I believe the word you are looking for is 'farce'.
On the post: Another Bogus Hit From A License Plate Reader Results In Another Citizen Surrounded By Cops With Guns Out
Re: Re: Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
On the post: Another Bogus Hit From A License Plate Reader Results In Another Citizen Surrounded By Cops With Guns Out
Re: Re: Point (4) "...it's not legal to lie to an officer."
>In order to ensure that you can call the cop a liar about anything he *mistakenly* says you said, practice the following sentences until they are automatic.
>1) On advice of counsel, I do not answer questions, and I do not consent to searches.
>2) Am I being detained, or am I free to go?
And these things can't be misinterpreted or "misheard"?
I get that you don't want to shoot the breeze with your friendly patrol officer but answering the basic question in the simplest manner possible isn't a bad idea either.
Example: I got caught in two "safety" stops last month. When you work the night shift in a not-good part of town such things are a fact of life.
Here's how they went down:
Cop approaches, looks at my car through the windows and asks to see my ID. I hand it to him. He asks, "Do you still live at [address]."
Good answer: "Yes."
Bad answer: "On the advice of counsel, I do not answer questions and I do not consent to searches."
Then he asks, "Are you headed to or from work?"
Good answer: "From work."
Bad answer: "On the advice of counsel, I do not answer questions and I do not consent to searches."
Then he asks, "Where do you work?"
Good answer: [place of employment]
Bad answer: "Am I being detained or am I free to go?"
End result is the same either way but if you give my bad answers the cop is going to remember you, run your plate and maybe find something you'd rather not have come up. He may also put a note in the database next to your plate number, "Individual acted suspiciously at routine safety stop."
On the post: Judge Otis Wright Slams 'Made Up' Government 'Plot' Designed To Ensnare Gullible Poor People
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Setting up Terrorists
Most jobs that don't require a college degree also don't pay enough for a person to go to college. Heck, you're lucky if you can make enough to get by without a second job.
On the post: Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Case After Handwritten Filing From Prisoner Representing Himself
Re: How Holt will handle the oral arguments since he's in prison.
Well played, Mr. Holt.
On the post: Supreme Court Agrees To Hear Case After Handwritten Filing From Prisoner Representing Himself
Re: Re:
Next >>