Do you want to know why people like this site and others like it, and why the following here is so large?
Sites like TechDirt take press releases and news stories full of corporate and political double speak/lies/utter and complete bullshit, remove the untruths and distraction, and leave us with something approximating the truth. Which is a breath of fresh air, in an age of corporate owned media outlets, all of which are either biased toward one side of the political spectrum or the other, or have agendas.
When you've got numerous government agencies that care more about their ability to gather intel or make their jobs easier than the safety and security of the public
Most of the time it is defense contractors and security firms selling the government a bill of goods, in an attempt to sell services or products (software) to them. The intel communities around the world believe, that more information is better, and that is not the case. The more information you have, the less likely it is that you will find anything of value due to false positives. In the end government electronic snooping makes us less safe not more.
Does this mean that radio stations, terrestrial and satellite based, could be held financially accountable for each song they played without the owners permission?
entire point of any war: to take something of economic value from the enemy and/or to eliminate the ability of the enemy to do something that war-maker objects to.
That's a pleasant view of war, if this was 100 years ago I would agree. Now its all about enriching the coffers of companies that manufacture weapons, plus what you said.
The past News Corp - MySpace deal is a good indication of what a non-internet company will do for an internet company. Five years down the line, the members of techdirt should get together, pool our lunch money, and buy Yahoo ...
500 db would take out the continent you are standing on ...
"Yes, you would also die. Sound is just pressure waves through air which our ears can hear, and since decibels are logarithmic they increase really quickly. A whisper is 40 dB, talking is 60, and hearing damage starts at 85. The loudest scream ever was 116 dB at 8 feet. A train horn is about 130. At 150 decibels you stop being able to breath. You feel like you are underwater from the amount of air being hurled at you. Past 160 flashlights and other battery-powered equipment will begin to fail due to electrical interference and your brain and eyes will start getting permanent damage. Humans exposed to 170 decibels have about a 50% chance of surviving. Above that the scale just kinda falls apart (edit: As many comments have pointed out, decibels aren't really an appropriate measure for things above this energy, because sound starts doing weird things. 194 dB is the same as the ambient air pressure in PSI at sea level, so beyond that it's not so much a sound as it is a blast or shockwave.) Around 185 dB you get the types of forces involved in tornadoes or pressure blasts from large bombs, capable of destroying everything in their path. The largest bomb used in Europe during WWII only made 220 decibels, and the bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki created 250. Krakatoa's eruption was 310 and blew out concrete walls 300 miles away. Tambora, the loudest sound ever recorded, was 325 decibels and had enough energy to dig a crater 12 miles wide and as deep as Yosemite. 500 decibels would likely annihilate large sections of whatever landmass you were on, possibly with enough force to launch debris into space. TL;DR: Yes, 500 dB for a thousandth of a second will make you go deaf. 120 decibels is usually considered the lower limit on instantaneous hearing loss. So don't stick your head in a jet engine or a subwoofer at a music festival, it might break your ears -- or kill you."
Your missing the big picture. It is not Googles job to police the internet, it is the content companies. It is not Googles job to scold, or educate based on some other corporations loosely defined and delusional wishes.
Here is the big picture, it is not up to Google to interpret what peoples motives are, when they are searching for "free (insert phrase here)" or "(phrase) download".
"Taylor Swift download" could mean the Apple IStore, etc. "Taylor Swift free download" could be part of a promotion. "Taylor Swift free" could be anything, tee shirts, music, key rings, pictures, song lyrics, YouTube videos, music from her record label, etc.
Also responding to this with arguments like, its a good bet..., Google knows what these people are asking for..., Google can tell who is going to ..., Google knows "X" means... , etc, will go unanswered as it implies the ability to read minds, or predict the future.
That would be the copyright on the contract he signed, not the plan. The plan calls for his remaining heirs to continue paying for 70 years after he passes ...
watching many sites retreat from interacting with their own audience has been a giant step backwards for on-line media
It is a giant step forward from their perspective. No more pesky kids, coming in and destroying their carefully crafted narratives. No more people calling them out for their bullshit, and out and out lies. No more people coming in and commenting on the inaccuracy of a given story. No more inconvenient "FACTS" showing up in the comments, making the authors and media company look totally clueless, or worse yet like utter and complete liars.
Again, from their perspective, it is a step forward.
Neural nets, evolutionary algorithms, and deep learning are inherently difficult to understand. Explaining why they came to a particular decision is almost impossible. When the model is sufficiently complex, and continuously updating itself based on the current input(s), it becomes impossible to describe the rationale, for a given decision after the fact, as the "state" of the machine will have changed.
Basically, the EU just shot itself in the foot where AI is concerned.
On the post: State Supreme Court Rolls Back Decision That Would Have Made Violating Company Computer Policies A Crime
On the post: DOJ Makes Smart Decision On Music Licensing... Music Publishers Completely Lose Their Shit
Re: Re:
On the post: Why Is The Copyright Office Lying To Protect The Cable Industry's Monopoly Stranglehold Over The Cable Box?
My only thought on this is
On the post: Even The Usual Defenders Of The RIAA Are Pointing Out They're Simply Lying About YouTube
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Regulation drums
Sites like TechDirt take press releases and news stories full of corporate and political double speak/lies/utter and complete bullshit, remove the untruths and distraction, and leave us with something approximating the truth. Which is a breath of fresh air, in an age of corporate owned media outlets, all of which are either biased toward one side of the political spectrum or the other, or have agendas.
On the post: What To Do About Lawless Government Hacking And The Weakening Of Digital Security
Re: Nice step two
Most of the time it is defense contractors and security firms selling the government a bill of goods, in an attempt to sell services or products (software) to them. The intel communities around the world believe, that more information is better, and that is not the case. The more information you have, the less likely it is that you will find anything of value due to false positives. In the end government electronic snooping makes us less safe not more.
On the post: No Matter Who Our Next President Is, They Won't Understand Technology
Re: Bullshit claim!
With the current list of presidential contenders, all their knowledge combined wouldn't match that of the local village idiot.
On the post: IP Lawyers Tell Copyright Office To Stop Screwing The Public By Opposing Cable Box Reform
Just realized something
That is insane.
On the post: IP Lawyers Tell Copyright Office To Stop Screwing The Public By Opposing Cable Box Reform
some real ADVICE on this subject
On the post: Putin's Internet Trolls Are Stoking The Vitriolic Fire By Posing As Trump Supporters
Didn't exist or wasn't discovered until December 2015? That is a very big difference.
On the post: But Wait: Copyright Law Is So Screwed Up, Perhaps The Rolling Stones Are Right That Donald Trump Needed Their Permission
On the post: Lawsuit Claims Frontier Misused Millions In Federal Broadband Stimulus Funds
Re: Re:
On the post: Declaring Cyberwar On Russia Because Of The DNC Hack Is A Bad Idea
Re: Re: Cyberwar
That's a pleasant view of war, if this was 100 years ago I would agree. Now its all about enriching the coffers of companies that manufacture weapons, plus what you said.
On the post: Verizon Buys Yahoo In $4.8 Billion Attempt To Bore The Internet To Death
History... Rinse, Lather, Repeat
Five years down the line, the members of techdirt should get together, pool our lunch money, and buy Yahoo ...
On the post: Google Issues Its Latest 'Stop Blaming Us For Piracy' Report
Re: Re:
Ford vs Buggies (past)
Cellphone makers vs Kodak (past)
A battery maker vs the auto industry (future)
Solar manufacturers vs fossil fuels and turbine makers (future)
etc
On the post: Appeals Court: It Violates CFAA For Service To Access Facebook On Behalf Of Users, Because Facebook Sent Cease & Desist
Re: Re: Re: Amateurs writing legislation
"Yes, you would also die. Sound is just pressure waves through air which our ears can hear, and since decibels are logarithmic they increase really quickly. A whisper is 40 dB, talking is 60, and hearing damage starts at 85. The loudest scream ever was 116 dB at 8 feet. A train horn is about 130.
At 150 decibels you stop being able to breath. You feel like you are underwater from the amount of air being hurled at you. Past 160 flashlights and other battery-powered equipment will begin to fail due to electrical interference and your brain and eyes will start getting permanent damage.
Humans exposed to 170 decibels have about a 50% chance of surviving.
Above that the scale just kinda falls apart (edit: As many comments have pointed out, decibels aren't really an appropriate measure for things above this energy, because sound starts doing weird things. 194 dB is the same as the ambient air pressure in PSI at sea level, so beyond that it's not so much a sound as it is a blast or shockwave.) Around 185 dB you get the types of forces involved in tornadoes or pressure blasts from large bombs, capable of destroying everything in their path. The largest bomb used in Europe during WWII only made 220 decibels, and the bombs used on Hiroshima and Nagasaki created 250. Krakatoa's eruption was 310 and blew out concrete walls 300 miles away. Tambora, the loudest sound ever recorded, was 325 decibels and had enough energy to dig a crater 12 miles wide and as deep as Yosemite.
500 decibels would likely annihilate large sections of whatever landmass you were on, possibly with enough force to launch debris into space.
TL;DR: Yes, 500 dB for a thousandth of a second will make you go deaf. 120 decibels is usually considered the lower limit on instantaneous hearing loss. So don't stick your head in a jet engine or a subwoofer at a music festival, it might break your ears -- or kill you."
On the post: Google Issues Its Latest 'Stop Blaming Us For Piracy' Report
Re:
Here is the big picture, it is not up to Google to interpret what peoples motives are, when they are searching for "free (insert phrase here)" or "(phrase) download".
"Taylor Swift download" could mean the Apple IStore, etc.
"Taylor Swift free download" could be part of a promotion.
"Taylor Swift free" could be anything, tee shirts, music, key rings, pictures, song lyrics, YouTube videos, music from her record label, etc.
Also responding to this with arguments like, its a good bet..., Google knows what these people are asking for..., Google can tell who is going to ..., Google knows "X" means... , etc, will go unanswered as it implies the ability to read minds, or predict the future.
On the post: Verizon Tries To 'Debunk' News Reports Pointing Out Its New Wireless Plans Stink
Re: Re:
hope that clarifies things ;-)
On the post: New York Times Public Editor Scolded For Suggesting Websites Should Treat News Commenters Like Actual Human Beings
Re:
It is a giant step forward from their perspective. No more pesky kids, coming in and destroying their carefully crafted narratives. No more people calling them out for their bullshit, and out and out lies. No more people coming in and commenting on the inaccuracy of a given story. No more inconvenient "FACTS" showing up in the comments, making the authors and media company look totally clueless, or worse yet like utter and complete liars.
Again, from their perspective, it is a step forward.
On the post: Homeland Security Committee Thinks Backdoors Are Bad, But Encryption Still A Problem The Government Needs To Fix
One quick thing ...
The 2015 Paris attacks used burner cell phones, not encryption.
On the post: Activists Cheer On EU's 'Right To An Explanation' For Algorithmic Decisions, But How Will It Work When There's Nothing To Explain?
Re:
Basically, the EU just shot itself in the foot where AI is concerned.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genetic_algorithm
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artificial_neural_netwo rk
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deep_learning
Next >>