Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 5:51pm
Re: Calling a turd a turd
While I agree...God I hate acronyms, or more accurately initials that are supposed to mean...something.
I could argue that I am too old to learn something new, but that is not actually correct. I could also argue that what the generation or two generations (or maybe three) behind me expect the rest of us to conform to 'what they want' and while the rest of us could choose not to, we tend to. That does not mean that acceptance of change for the sake of change is a good thing. Do these changes make things better? Not likely. Do these things make things simpler, not unless your texting and are concerned with your data usage. Should texting rules rule life, or the rest of humanities communications rules? Should style books be updated daily, weekly, monthly, annually? Then what is the responsibility of the rest of humanity to keep up?
I have other things to do than keep up with the abrogations of younger generations communication idiosyncrasies.
This is not to say that you should not bend to the will of the newest generations and conform to their methods of communication. At some point, one needs to communicate with them. On the other hand, there is no reason for them to not understand what we have to say just because they decide that we are old fogies and therefore have nothing to pass on. If they wish to move forward, they had better understand their own, meaning our, past, or they are just moving, and not necessarily forward.
To the point, making up new initial representations of sayings does not help in the cause of communication (though thank you for spelling it out at the end). Be clear and try to be concise (I sometimes have trouble there). Tell us what you think and why you think it. Back it up with references where appropriate.
In the end, yes FOSTA, or it's predecessor SESTA, are in fact TURDS.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 4:53pm
Yes, we will hop right to it...when convenient
Expecting the government to be expeditious is a bit of an overreach, even if they do change their policy. One can certainly hope, but one should also mitigate expectations with some practical knowledge (aka experience).
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 4:49pm
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cost-benefit calculations
The ones at the airport are free (depending upon ones definition of free, which might be Constitution free in these cases), but the ones where the do the cavity and entrails searches at the hospital are different. There, they think that even though some government agency ordered the searches, the searchee is the one responsible for expenses. Sure seems like they should be charging the ordering entity.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 4:40pm
Houdini Effect
While Harry Houdini was more renowned for his escapes, he did practice slight of hand. This practice of slight of hand within our legislative bodies is more reprehensible than that of a magician where we expect to be deceived. Our legislatures should not be deceiving us, they should be straight forward and upright and representing our interests, not those of large contributors or lobbyists.
Or were they about trying to deceive themselves? One faction vs another faction?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 11:44am
Re:
It might depend upon how one defines the risk. If it is only risk of death, it means one thing. If it is also a risk of personal violations, Constitutional violations, sexual violations or integrity violations, then risk means some other things.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 9:35am
Re: Re: Re: Re: So?
"...and look at the financial bottom line (which is what this is supposedly all about)..."
Except when it's about control. The entertainment industry has, via their behavior, in no uncertain terms told us that they want the Internet to be some form of TV or Cable where they decide what we consume, when we consume it, where we consume it, and how dear that consumption is to us. They want to be in the position to monetize every usage times every consumer present, all the time, whether that is reasonable or not. They would be happy with someone buying a DVD and then be able to effect some incremental charge every time that DVD is inserted in a player.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 6 Aug 2018 @ 9:21am
Re: Re: Re: So?
There are a few stores where they want to search me on exit, after paying for my purchases. My first reaction is, no you may not search me, and I continue on my way. My second reaction is to never go to that store, or any other of the same chain, ever again. Their aggression equals their loss.
The entertainment industries have had a similar effect.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Aug 2018 @ 6:41pm
Re: Political parties need to be abolished... End of discussion.
Not bad, I have been advocating something similar for years. You should add, remove money from politics, sunset all laws every seven years, and limit lobbying to constituents rather than professional lobbyists. There are probably a few more reforms needed as well.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 3 Aug 2018 @ 6:10pm
Re: Re:
Or, they have paid for agendas. Those paying might be corporations, they might be PAC's, or they might be their party leaders. I suspect you wouldn't find any of this rhetoric in their campaign speeches.
Your suggestion that they are following their constituents wishes is just laughable. There are too many examples of them doing otherwise for it to be anything else. Besides, how could we be sure that they are listening to a majority of their constituents especially when what they are proposing is likely not Constitutional (First Amendment violations: "Congress shall make no law...").
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Aug 2018 @ 3:35pm
Re: What's the alternative explanation, then?
I am not saying this is the correct answer, but in response to your question:
The voting machine companies that have already sold 'secure' machines to the states don't want their equipment replaced with someone else's 'more secure' equipment, and they have already paid their bribes, um...erm...campaign contributions.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 2 Aug 2018 @ 8:44am
Re:
I don't think Charter's CEO and Trump live in the same world. Charter's CEO thinks his company is doing a good job, and Trump thinks we need to present a picture ID to buy groceries. Neither of those is the same world, but then again, it's not our world either.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 1 Aug 2018 @ 2:29pm
Re: Re: Re: Pentagon Papers
Tell that to crime novelists. They spend a lot of time thinking up and then publishing how to do bad stuff, then creating ways for the 'good guys' to catch them.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 1 Aug 2018 @ 7:41am
Default Settings
What is the advantage to Amazon for making the default setting at 80% confidence. Why not start with 100%, with instruction on how and when to turn it down? Do they want more 'hits' in order to make sales? Seems like that would backfire in the long run. Actually, looks like it is backfiring now.
The other question that pops, is if Amazon recommends that law enforcement use a 95% confidence rating, and law enforcement is their primary sales target, then why isn't the default setting 95%?
It is incredible that what you say is true. From one of the linked articles, The Fifth Circuit claims the Supreme Court instructs courts to nitpick and test every unique instance in order to determine if that particular instance violates the plain language of the Constitution, thereby 'clearly establishing' the law.
There are legitimate reasons to have some exceptions to the plain language of the Constitution, and in order to get there particular instances must be tested. However, those instances should be selected because some unique part of the behavior is so out of the ordinary that there might be some cause for the exception. Otherwise, there should be a presumption of clear establishment.
How dare those potential terrorists behave like normal people? Given enough normal we will wind up surveilling everyone. Our next step is to ask Congress to authorize hiring half the country, so that we can surveil the other half, which will do wonders for unemployment but not much for the economy.
Our biggest problem will be finding those willing to do the work who are not already on our terrorist watchlists, which won't be easy as we add people for overly normal behavior. We are also seeking companies who will help us to define a new normal. This will help us to refine (aka add) who should be watched.
Wasn't the major problem Google fiber had was access to poles? If Google were to take over in NY, they would be in control of the poles, at least withing Charters current footprint.
Whether they want to lay all that fiber now is another question.
I was thinking he would just stop enough citizens and confiscate (I mean charge) their money until his portion equaled the $70,000 he owes. Shouldn't take too long, and he might get lucky. The problem with this theory is that by then a new model year would be out and he will be wanting the newest one.
On the post: SESTA, FOSTA, And How To Make Sense Of The Acronym Soup
Re: Calling a turd a turd
I could argue that I am too old to learn something new, but that is not actually correct. I could also argue that what the generation or two generations (or maybe three) behind me expect the rest of us to conform to 'what they want' and while the rest of us could choose not to, we tend to. That does not mean that acceptance of change for the sake of change is a good thing. Do these changes make things better? Not likely. Do these things make things simpler, not unless your texting and are concerned with your data usage. Should texting rules rule life, or the rest of humanities communications rules? Should style books be updated daily, weekly, monthly, annually? Then what is the responsibility of the rest of humanity to keep up?
I have other things to do than keep up with the abrogations of younger generations communication idiosyncrasies.
This is not to say that you should not bend to the will of the newest generations and conform to their methods of communication. At some point, one needs to communicate with them. On the other hand, there is no reason for them to not understand what we have to say just because they decide that we are old fogies and therefore have nothing to pass on. If they wish to move forward, they had better understand their own, meaning our, past, or they are just moving, and not necessarily forward.
To the point, making up new initial representations of sayings does not help in the cause of communication (though thank you for spelling it out at the end). Be clear and try to be concise (I sometimes have trouble there). Tell us what you think and why you think it. Back it up with references where appropriate.
In the end, yes FOSTA, or it's predecessor SESTA, are in fact TURDS.
On the post: BBC Migrates Everything To HTTPS, Immediately Finds Itself Blocked By The Chinese Government
Truth is antithetical to our cause
1,415,603,613 people will only sit around for this for a certain amount of time. Then...
On the post: Federal Circuit Agrees To Speed Up Publication Of Court Documents After EFF Complaint
Yes, we will hop right to it...when convenient
On the post: Surprisingly Rational TSA Plan To Drop Screening At Small Airports Has Almost Zero Chance Of Getting Off The Ground
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Cost-benefit calculations
On the post: SESTA, FOSTA, And How To Make Sense Of The Acronym Soup
Houdini Effect
While Harry Houdini was more renowned for his escapes, he did practice slight of hand. This practice of slight of hand within our legislative bodies is more reprehensible than that of a magician where we expect to be deceived. Our legislatures should not be deceiving us, they should be straight forward and upright and representing our interests, not those of large contributors or lobbyists.
Or were they about trying to deceive themselves? One faction vs another faction?
On the post: Surprisingly Rational TSA Plan To Drop Screening At Small Airports Has Almost Zero Chance Of Getting Off The Ground
Re:
On the post: Yet Another Study Shows You Beat Piracy Through Innovation, Rather Than Enforcement
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So?
On the post: Yet Another Study Shows You Beat Piracy Through Innovation, Rather Than Enforcement
Re: Re: Re: Re: So?
Except when it's about control. The entertainment industry has, via their behavior, in no uncertain terms told us that they want the Internet to be some form of TV or Cable where they decide what we consume, when we consume it, where we consume it, and how dear that consumption is to us. They want to be in the position to monetize every usage times every consumer present, all the time, whether that is reasonable or not. They would be happy with someone buying a DVD and then be able to effect some incremental charge every time that DVD is inserted in a player.
On the post: Yet Another Study Shows You Beat Piracy Through Innovation, Rather Than Enforcement
Re: Re: Re: So?
The entertainment industries have had a similar effect.
On the post: Rep. Kevin McCarthy Continues The Parade Of Stupid Anti-Internet Grandstanding
Re: Political parties need to be abolished... End of discussion.
On the post: Rep. Kevin McCarthy Continues The Parade Of Stupid Anti-Internet Grandstanding
Re: Re:
Your suggestion that they are following their constituents wishes is just laughable. There are too many examples of them doing otherwise for it to be anything else. Besides, how could we be sure that they are listening to a majority of their constituents especially when what they are proposing is likely not Constitutional (First Amendment violations: "Congress shall make no law...").
On the post: Election Security Has Become A Partisan Issue As Senate Votes Down Funding
Re: What's the alternative explanation, then?
The voting machine companies that have already sold 'secure' machines to the states don't want their equipment replaced with someone else's 'more secure' equipment, and they have already paid their bribes, um...erm...campaign contributions.
On the post: Charter CEO Apparently Unaware He Runs One Of The Most Despised Companies In America
Re:
On the post: Ignorant Hysteria Over 3D Printed Guns Leads To Courts Ignoring The First Amendment
Re: Re: Re: Pentagon Papers
On the post: Congress Members Demand Answers From, Investigation Of Federal Facial Rec Tech Users
Default Settings
The other question that pops, is if Amazon recommends that law enforcement use a 95% confidence rating, and law enforcement is their primary sales target, then why isn't the default setting 95%?
On the post: You Caught A Bullshit 'Photographing The Police' Arrest Too Soon, Federal Judge Tells Plaintiff
Re:
It is incredible that what you say is true. From one of the linked articles, The Fifth Circuit claims the Supreme Court instructs courts to nitpick and test every unique instance in order to determine if that particular instance violates the plain language of the Constitution, thereby 'clearly establishing' the law.
There are legitimate reasons to have some exceptions to the plain language of the Constitution, and in order to get there particular instances must be tested. However, those instances should be selected because some unique part of the behavior is so out of the ordinary that there might be some cause for the exception. Otherwise, there should be a presumption of clear establishment.
On the post: TSA Sending Air Marshals All Over The US To Tail Non-Terrorist US Citizens
Normal isn't so normal anymore
Our biggest problem will be finding those willing to do the work who are not already on our terrorist watchlists, which won't be easy as we add people for overly normal behavior. We are also seeking companies who will help us to define a new normal. This will help us to refine (aka add) who should be watched.
On the post: New York State Votes To Kick Charter Out Of The State For Poor Service, Failing To Meet Merger Conditions
Re: Re: Re: Charter’s Replacement?
Whether they want to lay all that fiber now is another question.
On the post: DOJ Tells Sheriff To Give It Back The $70,000 In Forfeiture Funds He Spent To Buy Himself A New Sports Car
Re:
On the post: DOJ Tells Sheriff To Give It Back The $70,000 In Forfeiture Funds He Spent To Buy Himself A New Sports Car
Re: Swap
Next >>