Good point (and Phillip). Having lived in SF in the past, I had to wonder whether the constant moisture in the air (hello fog, hello ocean breeze) would have exceeded the sensor's tolerance.
They ought to just check for a high-water mark when they service these things (jk) .
If many people are wearing devices that record everything they see and hear, suddenly such laws become a bit ridiculous
I can see where there may logical modifications, but I certainly hope we do not entirely do away with these laws.
While I can see sense in liberalizing the laws for video taken in public places, I would never want to lose a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in my home, for instance. That would play much better into the hands of tyrants than serve any socially useful purpose for perpetual life-documentary creation (an interesting phenomenon, but an entire waste of time IMO).
In any case, video of public employees (especially police) on the job should not be restricted. They ought to be accountable to the people they purportedly serve.
Thank you, I have wondered just how one from Kalamazoo properly referenced himself as such. (Not Kalamazooian or Kalamazooweegan) Good luck with those t&j bastards.
the obit section is the rarity they are selling to pay for the rest of the paper.
Yay! You read the article. Now come up with an argument why the article's warning (that this is a stupid idea because newspaper death notices are pretty much superfluous anymore) is in some way inaccurate. You can do it! Or can you see that no business model, no matter how "masnick", will work well when employed with a misguided premise.
Sorry, but violations of privacy by government and government funded agencies clearly stem from the government in place: the so called "two-party" system. Neither "party" has taken a very high ground on this issue.
And neither have the "democrats", who reign in both the congress and the white house, taken one step to repeal any part of the Patriot act or remove any safe harbors from the equally culpable telcos who provided spy services.
IMO, if you support either side of the Dem-Repub "debate", then you are partially to blame for the state of emergency in which our fundamental rights now exist.
it would probably be the most lopsided defeat of all time..
It's not about whether you win or lose, it's about how much damage you can do in the process. I say go for it, go forth with the blessings of Ralph and Ross and that one sane two-party guy who got kicked out and swept under the carpet.
There would be absolutely no benefit to the arts or sciences by making the government a collection society under the guise in the article.
I cannot think of any better way to create a disincentive to innovation than to 1) force the government determine who should by attributed to an idea (license), 2) enforce taxes on any "children" of said idea that would be redirected to the government's named owner(s).
For one, the government can't account for the taxes it collects already. See: the social security system. Why would anyone trust the government accurately manage anything that ends up in the general fund (i.e. all tax revenue including SS)?
For another, who the heck thinks the government would actually let a "little guy" stay attributed to a multi-billion dollar idea? Any license worth the effort would be indentured by insiders and attributed to a previously invisible prior license.
No thanks. I think this is actually the system copytards would prefer, rather than having to extort individuals directly.
I suppose a less scientific take would be that a stack of cash can make it real easy to rest on one's laurels. After all, it was hunger that created the spear.
And poor parenting, and an ever-shortening list of legal engaging experiences in the outdoors, and widespread social-anxiety disorder, counter-narcissistic revulsion, and on and on.
But yeah.. playing a game non-stop is absolutely behavior of the individual.
'tao' do you think the government should be involved in regulating stupid but non-criminal behavior?
After all, is not the best government the one that does not govern at all?
but instead using your identity to steal from you.
This had not occurred to me, Dude. Used in that context (rather than the context I have inferred all along)I guess ID theft would always be fraud and theft.
On the post: Canadian Entertainment Industry Begins New Media Campaign For Draconian Copyright Laws
Closed "Discussion"
++ to Chronno
On the post: iPhone Hits Just Keep On Coming For Apple: Sued Over Liquid Damage Sensors
Re: well known false positives
They ought to just check for a high-water mark when they service these things (jk) .
On the post: Maryland Police Confiscate Biker's Computers After He Catches Questionable Activity On Helmet Cam
Public / Private
I can see where there may logical modifications, but I certainly hope we do not entirely do away with these laws.
While I can see sense in liberalizing the laws for video taken in public places, I would never want to lose a "reasonable expectation of privacy" in my home, for instance. That would play much better into the hands of tyrants than serve any socially useful purpose for perpetual life-documentary creation (an interesting phenomenon, but an entire waste of time IMO).
In any case, video of public employees (especially police) on the job should not be restricted. They ought to be accountable to the people they purportedly serve.
On the post: The Future Of Print: Better Connect With Your Audience
Re:
Fly me to the Eyjafjallajokull
Da-Do-do-do-do-do
Sorry, couldn't resist.
Interesting article.
On the post: Towing Company Feels The Streisand Effect After Suing A College Kid For $750k
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Thank you, I have wondered just how one from Kalamazoo properly referenced himself as such. (Not Kalamazooian or Kalamazooweegan) Good luck with those t&j bastards.
On the post: Newspapers' Revenue Plan: If Lots Of People Used To Give Us A Little, We'll Now Get A Few People To Give Us A Lot!
Re: Re: Re:
Yay! You read the article. Now come up with an argument why the article's warning (that this is a stupid idea because newspaper death notices are pretty much superfluous anymore) is in some way inaccurate. You can do it! Or can you see that no business model, no matter how "masnick", will work well when employed with a misguided premise.
On the post: Laptop Spy Scandal Administrator Just "Loved" Violating Students' Fourth Amendment Rights
Re: Not at all surprised
And neither have the "democrats", who reign in both the congress and the white house, taken one step to repeal any part of the Patriot act or remove any safe harbors from the equally culpable telcos who provided spy services.
IMO, if you support either side of the Dem-Repub "debate", then you are partially to blame for the state of emergency in which our fundamental rights now exist.
On the post: Now That Everyone's Seen ACTA, USTR Says 'It's Time To Release It'
Re: Re: Re:
It's not about whether you win or lose, it's about how much damage you can do in the process. I say go for it, go forth with the blessings of Ralph and Ross and that one sane two-party guy who got kicked out and swept under the carpet.
On the post: Compulsory Licensing Rather Than Artificial Monopolies?
Agree, Bad Road
I cannot think of any better way to create a disincentive to innovation than to 1) force the government determine who should by attributed to an idea (license), 2) enforce taxes on any "children" of said idea that would be redirected to the government's named owner(s).
For one, the government can't account for the taxes it collects already. See: the social security system. Why would anyone trust the government accurately manage anything that ends up in the general fund (i.e. all tax revenue including SS)?
For another, who the heck thinks the government would actually let a "little guy" stay attributed to a multi-billion dollar idea? Any license worth the effort would be indentured by insiders and attributed to a previously invisible prior license.
No thanks. I think this is actually the system copytards would prefer, rather than having to extort individuals directly.
On the post: Tories Use Keane Song Without Asking Permission
Re: PRS?
These are politicians... what on earth would make you presume such a thing?
On the post: Irish Judge OKs Three Strikes, Calls Copyright A Human Right
Wh...
Ireland just became the East Texas of Europe.
On the post: Frontier Communications "Testing" To See How Users Respond To Being Ridiculously Overcharged For Bandwidth
Re: Re: Doesn't seem right somehow....
I'm about to download an economy of scale and pistol-whip it.
On the post: What If More Money Makes People Less Inclined To Create?
Re: What 'other' models
Snicker.
On the post: South Korea To Shut Some Video Games Off For Six Hours Every Night
Re:
On the post: What If More Money Makes People Less Inclined To Create?
Re: Re: Curious
HA HA HA!
The story of the first patent hoarder. Thanks for that DH
On the post: What If More Money Makes People Less Inclined To Create?
Curious
On the post: South Korea To Shut Some Video Games Off For Six Hours Every Night
Re: Re:
And poor parenting, and an ever-shortening list of legal engaging experiences in the outdoors, and widespread social-anxiety disorder, counter-narcissistic revulsion, and on and on.
But yeah.. playing a game non-stop is absolutely behavior of the individual.
'tao' do you think the government should be involved in regulating stupid but non-criminal behavior?
After all, is not the best government the one that does not govern at all?
On the post: Copying Is Not Theft
This had not occurred to me, Dude. Used in that context (rather than the context I have inferred all along)I guess ID theft would always be fraud and theft.
Still copying != theft.
On the post: Copying Is Not Theft
Re: Re: Re:
They stole my goo!
[(c) Parker & Stone 2010 ]
On the post: Copying Is Not Theft
Re:
Correct.. identity theft is actually fraud. Unless, of course, they actually steal your driver's license or some article... then its fraud and theft.
Next >>