There is some irony to be found on those who are taking pot shots are doing so anonymously, as is recognized by the 1st Amend. as being important.
I would be surprised if many of them didn't turn out to be Ayyadurai, his legal team, or people otherwise employed (marketing, SEO, etc) by Ayyadurai and/or any backers he may have.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What goes around, comes around
These statements also resulted in a wave of efforts by others to discredit Dr. Ayyadurai and erase him from the history of electronic communications, attacks on Wikipedia that remove reference to his contribution,...
I think that quote would be more accurate if it read:
"These statements also resulted in a wave of efforts by others to correct the disinformation spread by Dr. Ayyadurai and correctly state his place in the history of electronic communications, edits on wikipedia that more accurately reflect the history..."
Any threats which were followed through with (e.g. taking it to court) have been defeated.
Backpage is giving in to threats that have no legal basis behind them. It's enabling these people to do the same thing to others. They are giving in blackmail.
Based on the writing style of that post, are you sure you're not 14 years old?
Sorry, but it was a bit of a wade, and I'm still not sure I understand all of it. I'm not a stickler for spelling and grammar, but there's a difference between being not formally correct and being incomprehensible.
Looking at this purely analytically, not regarding whether it's a police union or some other type of body...
I'd think that that sort of tactic would destroy the paying members confidence in their organisation that they are paying to protect and advocate for them. Where for what their management perceive to be good members they go all out, launch PR campaigns etc. But for what they perceive as bad - but still paying the same membership fee - members, they don't do all that...wouldn't that destroy your faith in them as an organisation?
If I was in such a union who undertook those tactics, I'd be leaving it and finding a different one who treated all their members the same.
OK, I just did a quick read up of champerty and maintenance on wikipipedia. According to that font of absolute truth, while these acts in my opinion do fall under the definition (as provided by wikipedia!) of champerty and maintenance, the problem is that, also according to wikipedia, it is no longer a crime to do so in many jurisdictions. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not it is that, because if it is it's not legally wrong to do so.
So that there is more reason to force upgrades on consumers.
When I was a kid, a TV was like a fridge or washing machine - you'd buy a new one every decade or so. Maybe have a 2nd smaller one for the kids, which is most likely a hand-me-down from when the main TV was upgraded to an OMG 68cm so the 48cm it was replacing was moved off to the kids room.
But by incorporating many unnecessary technologies in the TV - media players, web browsers, players for specific eco-systems (netflix, amazon etc) that aren't upgradeable, or that they only support for a year or 2 with upgrades (like a mobile phone), there are more opportunities to foist upgrades on users.
I also have one remote control to control everything, and while I do have a smart TV, it has no data connectivity outside HDMI cables.
My one remote control controls a HTPC that does everything except displaying the actual image. It plays movies on the HTPC out to the TV, music, free-to-air TV, it records that TV if I want to time-shift it. If I want to surf the net using my TV as my display, I do, but the surfing occurs on the HTPC using a wireless (or wired if i feel like it) keyboard, mouse, or the remote control which is a wireless pointer as well. I can play games without switching devices (Civ, Battlefield and whatnot). I can update video and audio codecs on the HTPC whenever I need to to play the latest and greatest format, without having to worry about the TV vendor refusing to update its codec set in the hopes I'll buy a complete new TV just to get the latest codecs. I can use the latest software, browsers, and whatever else I want.
The only time I need to replace the TV is when either the screen breaks, or there have been significant changes in dislay hardware technology. E.g. CRT -> 720p/1080p Plasma -> 1080p LED backlit LCD -> 4k OLED HDR. Not every time there is a minor software technology or hardware change like xVid -> x264 -> x265. USB 2 -> 3 -> 3.1 (Type A or C) gen2, or 100Mb -> 1Gb (hopefully soon! -> 2.5Gb -> 5Gb), or wireless A/G -> N -> AC , and so on.
If they had any proof it would be coming from the hacks, backdoors and trojans the US and other western countries installed into the Russian systems prior to their last election.
Therefore any proof of Russian hacking would expose the US hacking of the Russians.
Nah, Star Trek is still in copyright, so they'd have to pay for it.
Probably put It's a Wonderful Life on a continuous loop since it's out of copyright, which is BTW why it's on every Christmas, it's free for the broadcasters.
How is reciting the business-related reasons for collecting the data bias?
I don't see any expression of opinion on whether it is good or bad, whether the poster supports it or not. Just a list of reasons why a business would want to collect the data.
"Alexa, order two gallons of bleach from Amazon Fresh, for delivery today."
Maybe you should of asked Alexa how to forensically remove blood-stains. Although I don't know if it'd give the right information, would be interesting to find out ;)
You'd be better off ordering 1 gallon of chlorine-based bleach and 1 gallon of oxygen-based bleach and using 1 after the other (not at the same time - don't mix them together) on the blood-stains.
Chlorine-based bleach destroys DNA in blood samples, so they can't get a DNA match from the bloodstains. However luminol will still detect the presence of blood (or more specifically, the red blood cells based on iron).
So to defeat the luminol test, you then apply the oxygen-based bleach, which will neutralize the iron in the red blood cells that luminol uses to detect the blood. However, it won't destroy the DNA in the blood stain.
Therefore you need to use both to defeat the luminol and destroy the DNA.
The third-party doctrine is a United States legal theory that holds that people who voluntarily give information to third parties—such as banks, phone companies, internet service providers (ISPs), and e-mail servers—have "no reasonable expectation of privacy." A lack of privacy protection allows the United States government to obtain information from third parties without a legal warrant and without otherwise complying with the Fourth Amendment prohibition against search and seizure without probable cause and a judicial search warrant.
Unless there is specific case law that excludes that information from 3rd-party, how is it unconstitutional? I think it should be unconstitutional, but that doesn't mean it is. Which is maybe what Amazon is trying to establish by refusing to hand over that information and, hopefully, prepared to defend its position in court if necessary.
On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life
Re:
I would be surprised if many of them didn't turn out to be Ayyadurai, his legal team, or people otherwise employed (marketing, SEO, etc) by Ayyadurai and/or any backers he may have.
On the post: Techdirt's First Amendment Fight For Its Life
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: What goes around, comes around
I think that quote would be more accurate if it read:
"These statements also resulted in a wave of efforts by others to correct the disinformation spread by Dr. Ayyadurai and correctly state his place in the history of electronic communications, edits on wikipedia that more accurately reflect the history..."
On the post: Iceland Forms A New Government... Without The Pirate Party
On the post: Backpage Kills Adult Ads On The Same Day Supreme Court Backed Its Legal Protections, Due To Grandstanding Senators
Re: I'll just leave this here for the Senators
One of the search results:
How appropriate ;)
On the post: Backpage Kills Adult Ads On The Same Day Supreme Court Backed Its Legal Protections, Due To Grandstanding Senators
Re: Lazy LEOs
That's because they want more time to be para-military anti-terroist organisations, rather than law-enforcement organisations.
On the post: Backpage Kills Adult Ads On The Same Day Supreme Court Backed Its Legal Protections, Due To Grandstanding Senators
Re: Re:
Backpage is giving in to threats that have no legal basis behind them. It's enabling these people to do the same thing to others. They are giving in blackmail.
On the post: What The US Intelligence 'Russia Hacked Our Election' Report Could Have Said... But Didn't
Re: lol
Sorry, but it was a bit of a wade, and I'm still not sure I understand all of it. I'm not a stickler for spelling and grammar, but there's a difference between being not formally correct and being incomprehensible.
On the post: Congressman Appoints Himself Censor, Removes Painting Critical Of Cops From Congressional Halls
Re: Re: Re: Head, meet desk
Looking at this purely analytically, not regarding whether it's a police union or some other type of body...
I'd think that that sort of tactic would destroy the paying members confidence in their organisation that they are paying to protect and advocate for them. Where for what their management perceive to be good members they go all out, launch PR campaigns etc. But for what they perceive as bad - but still paying the same membership fee - members, they don't do all that...wouldn't that destroy your faith in them as an organisation?
If I was in such a union who undertook those tactics, I'd be leaving it and finding a different one who treated all their members the same.
On the post: Congressman Appoints Himself Censor, Removes Painting Critical Of Cops From Congressional Halls
Re: Re: Re: Head, meet desk
Not at all. A union is a private body whose job is to protect and advocate for their members, not for non-members.
On the post: Great: Now Wall Street Is Funding Speculative Corporate Sovereignty Claims For A Share Of The Spoils
Re: Questioin here
OK, I just did a quick read up of champerty and maintenance on wikipipedia. According to that font of absolute truth, while these acts in my opinion do fall under the definition (as provided by wikipedia!) of champerty and maintenance, the problem is that, also according to wikipedia, it is no longer a crime to do so in many jurisdictions. Therefore it doesn't matter whether or not it is that, because if it is it's not legally wrong to do so.
On the post: Man Has To Beg LG To Uncripple His 'Smart' TV After Ransomware Attack
Re:
When I was a kid, a TV was like a fridge or washing machine - you'd buy a new one every decade or so. Maybe have a 2nd smaller one for the kids, which is most likely a hand-me-down from when the main TV was upgraded to an OMG 68cm so the 48cm it was replacing was moved off to the kids room.
But by incorporating many unnecessary technologies in the TV - media players, web browsers, players for specific eco-systems (netflix, amazon etc) that aren't upgradeable, or that they only support for a year or 2 with upgrades (like a mobile phone), there are more opportunities to foist upgrades on users.
On the post: Man Has To Beg LG To Uncripple His 'Smart' TV After Ransomware Attack
Re: Re:
I also have one remote control to control everything, and while I do have a smart TV, it has no data connectivity outside HDMI cables.
My one remote control controls a HTPC that does everything except displaying the actual image. It plays movies on the HTPC out to the TV, music, free-to-air TV, it records that TV if I want to time-shift it. If I want to surf the net using my TV as my display, I do, but the surfing occurs on the HTPC using a wireless (or wired if i feel like it) keyboard, mouse, or the remote control which is a wireless pointer as well. I can play games without switching devices (Civ, Battlefield and whatnot). I can update video and audio codecs on the HTPC whenever I need to to play the latest and greatest format, without having to worry about the TV vendor refusing to update its codec set in the hopes I'll buy a complete new TV just to get the latest codecs. I can use the latest software, browsers, and whatever else I want.
The only time I need to replace the TV is when either the screen breaks, or there have been significant changes in dislay hardware technology. E.g. CRT -> 720p/1080p Plasma -> 1080p LED backlit LCD -> 4k OLED HDR. Not every time there is a minor software technology or hardware change like xVid -> x264 -> x265. USB 2 -> 3 -> 3.1 (Type A or C) gen2, or 100Mb -> 1Gb (hopefully soon! -> 2.5Gb -> 5Gb), or wireless A/G -> N -> AC , and so on.
On the post: Whether Or Not You Believe Russia Interfered In The Election, We Should All Be Worried About Escalation Based On Secret Info
Therefore any proof of Russian hacking would expose the US hacking of the Russians.
On the post: Whether Or Not You Believe Russia Interfered In The Election, We Should All Be Worried About Escalation Based On Secret Info
Fixed it.
On the post: Whether Or Not You Believe Russia Interfered In The Election, We Should All Be Worried About Escalation Based On Secret Info
Re: Re: Precedent ??
Damn, maybe they need new radar systems, if they're that slow they wouldn't be any use in live-fire situation!
On the post: Now Italy Wants To Make 'Fake News' Illegal
Re: Bring it to the US
Nah, Star Trek is still in copyright, so they'd have to pay for it.
Probably put It's a Wonderful Life on a continuous loop since it's out of copyright, which is BTW why it's on every Christmas, it's free for the broadcasters.
On the post: Now Italy Wants To Make 'Fake News' Illegal
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Can we call this what it is?
No they are not, hence the term is made up of a phrase lie of omission as opposed to just the word lie.
On the post: Amazon Refuses To Comply With Police Request For Amazon Echo Recordings In Murder Case
Re: Re: What Amazon does
How is reciting the business-related reasons for collecting the data bias?
I don't see any expression of opinion on whether it is good or bad, whether the poster supports it or not. Just a list of reasons why a business would want to collect the data.
On the post: Amazon Refuses To Comply With Police Request For Amazon Echo Recordings In Murder Case
Re: Queries I hope Alexa forgot
Maybe you should of asked Alexa how to forensically remove blood-stains. Although I don't know if it'd give the right information, would be interesting to find out ;)
You'd be better off ordering 1 gallon of chlorine-based bleach and 1 gallon of oxygen-based bleach and using 1 after the other (not at the same time - don't mix them together) on the blood-stains.
Chlorine-based bleach destroys DNA in blood samples, so they can't get a DNA match from the bloodstains. However luminol will still detect the presence of blood (or more specifically, the red blood cells based on iron).
So to defeat the luminol test, you then apply the oxygen-based bleach, which will neutralize the iron in the red blood cells that luminol uses to detect the blood. However, it won't destroy the DNA in the blood stain.
Therefore you need to use both to defeat the luminol and destroy the DNA.
Or so I've heard...
On the post: Amazon Refuses To Comply With Police Request For Amazon Echo Recordings In Murder Case
Re: Corrupt Arkansas Judge
But is it? Wouldn't these just be business records under the third-party doctrine?
Unless there is specific case law that excludes that information from 3rd-party, how is it unconstitutional? I think it should be unconstitutional, but that doesn't mean it is. Which is maybe what Amazon is trying to establish by refusing to hand over that information and, hopefully, prepared to defend its position in court if necessary.
Next >>