Currently, Norton Crypto is limited to users with devices that meet the required system requirements.
Aside from everything else that's wrong with this, that sentence is a crime against the English language, logic, and common sense. Never mind "required requirements", what the fuck does it even mean? It's only currently limited to users with devices that meet the system requirements? In the future, is it not going to be limited to users with devices that meet the system requirements? And wouldn't that mean that, you know, they're not actually requirements?
Dead people are convenient too. Just look at all the racists who like to break out the ol' "Martin Luther King would agree with me, actually. Permit me to demonstrate with the only MLK quote I know."
I find it weird how people worried about Facebook's size zero in on Section 230 rather than antitrust law.
I don't.
We've spent forty years having the Chicago School approach to antitrust hammered into our heads. Following the breakup of Ma Bell in the early '80s, Reagan, Greenspan, et al turned us hard toward the notion that any government interference in the market is bad. Following a disastrous few elections for Democrats, Clinton and the New Democrats came in in 1992 and basically ceded the party's economic strategy to the right.
It's taken a very long time for Democratic politicians to even begin to consider going back to a more aggressive stance on antitrust enforcement. Republicans probably never will.
That suggested law that removed them from the bench when they blow a 1st Amendment ruling is looking better and better isn't it?
While there are certainly a lot of judges who I wish were not on the bench, if you can't think of any downsides to granting the current Supreme Court majority the power to remove lower-court judges who disagree with them then I don't think you've thought your suggestion through to its logical conclusion.
Blaming carbon monoxide deaths on regulators for generators and barbecues when these people were using gens and charcoal grills as heaters inside their closed spaces is ridiculous.
And why were people using those things to heat their homes?
There seems to be some disagreement between the free software community and the CC community on whether a nonfree license can still be considered copyleft. The FSF, which popularized the term, defines copyleft in a way that precludes its use for nonfree software. Any license that doesn't satisfy the four freedoms cannot, by definition, be a copyleft license. And noncommercial clauses do not satisfy the four freedoms.
However, the CC's view on copyleft diverges. When you say "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial licenses are not copyleft as they are incompatible with BY-SA licenses," it's clear you didn't bother to check before making that assertion, because CC BY-NC-SA is listed right there on the Licenses page.
Whether or not BY-NC-SA still qualifies as copyleft is, I suppose, subject to debate. But regardless of whether you consider BY-NC-SA a copyleft license or not, BY and/or NC without SA are certainly not copyleft terms, which is the point I was making.
Ironic wordplay notwithstanding, neither CC-BY nor CC-NC are copyleft licenses in themselves. Copyleft licenses are licenses that require derivatives to be published under the same license. CC-SA ("sharealike") is copyleft, and can be combined with CC or NC.
Re: You might want to read up on the Catholic view towards "divo
Well, I mean, first of all I don't think Mike Lindell is Catholic, so there's that.
Second, there are all sorts of Catholic church dogmas that mainstream American Catholicism rejects. You know Catholics are supposed to oppose the death penalty too, right?
This is pretty common for a Trump suit -- the court doesn't even have to rule on the claims, because the suit doesn't even make any.
Same thing just happened with the appellate court throwing out his appeal on his claims of executive privilege regarding the January 6 materials. They said they don't even have to make a ruling on where the line is for past presidents to claim executive privilege, because the suit didn't even bother to mention what materials are privileged and what the legal rationale for protecting them is.
I don't think he has a good case, but I think if he had a competent legal team, he could make a better one, probably tie his suits up in court longer.
But these are not the filings of a competent legal team. These are the lawyers who are willing to work with Trump despite his reputation as a difficult client who won't listen and might not pay you, and who Trump is willing to work with because they won't tell him "no."
On the post: Norton 360 Now Comes With Crypto Mining Capabilities And Sketchy Removal Process
Aside from everything else that's wrong with this, that sentence is a crime against the English language, logic, and common sense. Never mind "required requirements", what the fuck does it even mean? It's only currently limited to users with devices that meet the system requirements? In the future, is it not going to be limited to users with devices that meet the system requirements? And wouldn't that mean that, you know, they're not actually requirements?
On the post: ICE Is So Toxic That The DHS's Investigative Wing Is Asking To Be Completely Separated From It
Re:
I think anything short of abolition is insufficient.
I think that immigration enforcement, by its nature, attracts people who hate immigrants. I do not think the problem can be solved.
On the post: NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas
Re: Re: Re:
That you lump together every single government official as "the politicians" is, I think, the problem.
On the post: US Courts Realizing They Have A Judge Alan Albright Sized Problem In Waco
Re:
What mechanism do you believe "they" have for removing a federal district judge?
Jesus Christ, what is this, the 1930s?
On the post: NY Senator Proposes Ridiculously Unconstitutional Social Media Law That Is The Mirror Opposite Of Equally Unconstitutional Laws In Florida & Texas
Re:
...I guess that comparison probably made sense in your head?
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of 2021 At Techdirt
Re:
Dead people are convenient too. Just look at all the racists who like to break out the ol' "Martin Luther King would agree with me, actually. Permit me to demonstrate with the only MLK quote I know."
On the post: Those Who Don't Understand Section 230 Are Doomed To Repeal It
Re: Antitrust Law
I don't.
We've spent forty years having the Chicago School approach to antitrust hammered into our heads. Following the breakup of Ma Bell in the early '80s, Reagan, Greenspan, et al turned us hard toward the notion that any government interference in the market is bad. Following a disastrous few elections for Democrats, Clinton and the New Democrats came in in 1992 and basically ceded the party's economic strategy to the right.
It's taken a very long time for Democratic politicians to even begin to consider going back to a more aggressive stance on antitrust enforcement. Republicans probably never will.
On the post: Confused Judge Grants Project Veritas' Prior Restraint Against The NY Times
Re:
While there are certainly a lot of judges who I wish were not on the bench, if you can't think of any downsides to granting the current Supreme Court majority the power to remove lower-court judges who disagree with them then I don't think you've thought your suggestion through to its logical conclusion.
On the post: Hey The North Face! When You Said Sending Us A Bogus Trademark Threat Was A Mistake, We Believed You; So Why Did You Do It Again?
Re: Right where they wanted you
...if you really want to contort yourself into a pretzel to avoid Hanlon's Razor, I guess.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Polio isn't extinct. It's close, but there are still hundreds of confirmed cases every year, mostly in Africa and Asia but occasionally in Europe too.
On the post: Texas Regulators Learned Nothing From February's Carnage, Prepare To Repeat The Cycle
Re: Point of order!
Thanks for explaining the joke!
On the post: Texas Regulators Learned Nothing From February's Carnage, Prepare To Repeat The Cycle
Re:
That's a weird thing to lie about in front of a bunch of people who know how to use search engines.
A Guide to the 2011 Texas Blackouts
On the post: Texas Regulators Learned Nothing From February's Carnage, Prepare To Repeat The Cycle
Re:
And why were people using those things to heat their homes?
On the post: The US Gov't Paid For Moderna To Develop Its Vaccine; But Moderna Wants To Keep The Patent All To Itself
Re: Articles that speak in their author's voice
I don't know if you've noticed, but there are some ways in which patent law could use some improvement.
In my opinion.
On the post: Another Example Of How The Playing Field Is Tilted In Favor Of Copyright Owners
Well, people who claim to be copyright owners, anyway.
On the post: Beware The CopyLEFT Trolls
Re: Re: definition of “copyleft”
There seems to be some disagreement between the free software community and the CC community on whether a nonfree license can still be considered copyleft. The FSF, which popularized the term, defines copyleft in a way that precludes its use for nonfree software. Any license that doesn't satisfy the four freedoms cannot, by definition, be a copyleft license. And noncommercial clauses do not satisfy the four freedoms.
However, the CC's view on copyleft diverges. When you say "Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial licenses are not copyleft as they are incompatible with BY-SA licenses," it's clear you didn't bother to check before making that assertion, because CC BY-NC-SA is listed right there on the Licenses page.
Whether or not BY-NC-SA still qualifies as copyleft is, I suppose, subject to debate. But regardless of whether you consider BY-NC-SA a copyleft license or not, BY and/or NC without SA are certainly not copyleft terms, which is the point I was making.
On the post: Beware The CopyLEFT Trolls
Ironic wordplay notwithstanding, neither CC-BY nor CC-NC are copyleft licenses in themselves. Copyleft licenses are licenses that require derivatives to be published under the same license. CC-SA ("sharealike") is copyleft, and can be combined with CC or NC.
On the post: Court Tells MyPillow CEO That Allegedly Dating An Actress And Buying Her Alcohol Isn't Defamatory
Re: You might want to read up on the Catholic view towards "divo
Well, I mean, first of all I don't think Mike Lindell is Catholic, so there's that.
Second, there are all sorts of Catholic church dogmas that mainstream American Catholicism rejects. You know Catholics are supposed to oppose the death penalty too, right?
On the post: Turkey's Dictator Erdogan, Who Has Sued Thousands Of Critics, Jailed More, Now Claims That 'Social Media' Is A 'Threat To Democracy'
Re: Sucks to be Turkish
...if you're blaming the voters for an autocracy, I think you may have missed the point.
On the post: DOJ Tells Courts They Don't Need To Explore The Constitutionality Of Section 230 To Toss Donald Trump's Dumb Lawsuits Out
This is pretty common for a Trump suit -- the court doesn't even have to rule on the claims, because the suit doesn't even make any.
Same thing just happened with the appellate court throwing out his appeal on his claims of executive privilege regarding the January 6 materials. They said they don't even have to make a ruling on where the line is for past presidents to claim executive privilege, because the suit didn't even bother to mention what materials are privileged and what the legal rationale for protecting them is.
I don't think he has a good case, but I think if he had a competent legal team, he could make a better one, probably tie his suits up in court longer.
But these are not the filings of a competent legal team. These are the lawyers who are willing to work with Trump despite his reputation as a difficult client who won't listen and might not pay you, and who Trump is willing to work with because they won't tell him "no."
Next >>