In the 90s I used to go to UN-related meetings in Geneva a lot.
There was always a guy from the State Dept. there to watch over the "US delegation" (most of whom represented private firms).
Every Friday he'd tell us to let State know everywhere we went outside our hotel over the weekend - not for infosec reasons, but because it's a "foreign country" and we could get into all kinds of trouble. We could get arrested and have no rights, not like at home in the US.
This was in Switzerland, the child-proofed chocolate-coated rubber room of Western Europe. Far safer than any place in the US - the main danger was overdosing on cheese.
But I think they really meant it.
There's something about the mentality of people who go to work for the US government - they really, truly, think all them furriners in nasty, terrible places like Switzerland, the UK, Austrialia, Japan (Japan!) are lawless hellholes without Good Old Fashioned Merican Democracy where people will be skinned alive for blinking at the wrong time.
That her promises are vague and self-contradictory is not news.
She's the very archetype of the slimy politician - she says whatever she thinks will get her votes now, in a slithery way calculated to leave her room to do the opposite later when she's in power.
And emphasizes whichever reading is favored by who she's talking to at the moment.
Unfortunately for those of us who live in the US, her opponent is Donald Trump.
I don't know what really happened here, but I'm strongly tempted to think this is the fault of the publishers of "No Man's Sky":
Publisher: Hey! "No Man's Sky" is coming!
Murdoch: Nasty letter - don't use "Sky" or we'll sue.
At this point what the publisher should have done:
Publisher: Screw you. You have no case. Sue if you want - you'll lose.
But what they actually did was:
Publisher: Oh no! Please don't sue us! Let's talk this over...
And so they got what they deserved for not having the balls to just publish.
Maybe that's not what happened. But freedom doesn't work if everyone is terrified to get out of bed in the morning. Sometimes you have to stand on your rights and accept the risk that the other party may sue - if you're reasonably sure you're within your rights (and will therefore win).
Otherwise, we have a permission-based society. Nobody does anything without consulting lawyers.
You work for a for-profit firm. Which, being for-profit and owned by investors who hope to make money, is inherently evil.
While the government, on the other hand, works for the peeple. So they're inherently good, and don't need any watching.
Because democracy, you see. Each peeple gets a 1-in-300-million say in what the government does. So the government would never do anything to hurt a peeple.
While an investor would of course kill anyone for a penny, if they could get away with it.
1 - Lockheed, a major defense contractor with decades of experience with computers and IT systems, for 12 years running, failed to backup or check their backups of a critical USAF system needed to verify USAF compliance with law.
or,
2 - The system was deliberately corrupted to cover up criminal activity.
It's hard to tell which is more likely.
Either way, heads need to roll. Every person in the management chain responsible for this debacle needs to be fired, from the CEO on down.
How many millions did the Pentagon pay Lockheed to screw this up?
On the post: US Intelligence Agencies To Americans Travelling Abroad: Trust No One, Use Burner Phones, They're All Out To Get You
Re: Switzerland, the child-proofed chocolate-coated rubber room of Western Europe.
On the post: US Intelligence Agencies To Americans Travelling Abroad: Trust No One, Use Burner Phones, They're All Out To Get You
It's not new, it's just how USG people think
There was always a guy from the State Dept. there to watch over the "US delegation" (most of whom represented private firms).
Every Friday he'd tell us to let State know everywhere we went outside our hotel over the weekend - not for infosec reasons, but because it's a "foreign country" and we could get into all kinds of trouble. We could get arrested and have no rights, not like at home in the US.
This was in Switzerland, the child-proofed chocolate-coated rubber room of Western Europe. Far safer than any place in the US - the main danger was overdosing on cheese.
But I think they really meant it.
There's something about the mentality of people who go to work for the US government - they really, truly, think all them furriners in nasty, terrible places like Switzerland, the UK, Austrialia, Japan (Japan!) are lawless hellholes without Good Old Fashioned Merican Democracy where people will be skinned alive for blinking at the wrong time.
It's a kind of paranoia and fear of the strange.
But it's real, and sincere.
On the post: Hillary Clinton's Intellectual Property Platform: Too Vague & Confusing
Like nailing jello to the wall
She's the very archetype of the slimy politician - she says whatever she thinks will get her votes now, in a slithery way calculated to leave her room to do the opposite later when she's in power.
And emphasizes whichever reading is favored by who she's talking to at the moment.
Unfortunately for those of us who live in the US, her opponent is Donald Trump.
I'm voting for Gary Johnson.
On the post: No Man's Sky Settles With Sky TV So It Can Have 'Sky' In Its Name
Re: Re: Re: Re: Their own fault?
There are more polite ways to say the same thing.
On the post: New T-Shirt: Home Cooking Is Killing Restaurants
Bastiat
Surely they need protection against unfair competition!
(Free PDF here: https://fee.org/media/14951/thelaw.pdf )
On the post: No Man's Sky Settles With Sky TV So It Can Have 'Sky' In Its Name
Re: Re: Their own fault?
There's a certain type of lawyer that always advises their client to spend more money on lawyering in any given context.
And there's a certain type of client (ignorant, terrified, unconfident, overly respectful of expertise, or some combination thereof) that lets them.
On the post: DailyDirt: Moonshot 2.0
Re: Moon Express
On the post: No Man's Sky Settles With Sky TV So It Can Have 'Sky' In Its Name
Re: Re: Their own fault?
At some point this one turned into an actual suit.
Still, I suspect if the publishers had handled the initial threat differently, the outcome would have been different.
(Not knowing the details, of course I may be mistaken.0
On the post: Sony Settlement Gives PS3 Owners $9 After Company Made Console Less Useful Via Firmware Update
Re: Re: filling out the paperwork for $9.
In class-action cases like this, the court should turn the award into a sort of lottery.
Instead of paying $9 to everyone, the court should chose 1 in 1000 litigants at random, and pay them $9000 each.
This would waste a whole lot less time for everyone.
On the post: No Man's Sky Settles With Sky TV So It Can Have 'Sky' In Its Name
Their own fault?
Publisher: Hey! "No Man's Sky" is coming!
Murdoch: Nasty letter - don't use "Sky" or we'll sue.
At this point what the publisher should have done:
Publisher: Screw you. You have no case. Sue if you want - you'll lose.
But what they actually did was:
Publisher: Oh no! Please don't sue us! Let's talk this over...
And so they got what they deserved for not having the balls to just publish.
Maybe that's not what happened. But freedom doesn't work if everyone is terrified to get out of bed in the morning. Sometimes you have to stand on your rights and accept the risk that the other party may sue - if you're reasonably sure you're within your rights (and will therefore win).
Otherwise, we have a permission-based society. Nobody does anything without consulting lawyers.
On the post: Air Force, Lockheed Martin Combine Forces To 'Lose' 100,000 Inspector General Investigations
Re: Let me get this straight
You work for a for-profit firm. Which, being for-profit and owned by investors who hope to make money, is inherently evil.
While the government, on the other hand, works for the peeple. So they're inherently good, and don't need any watching.
Because democracy, you see. Each peeple gets a 1-in-300-million say in what the government does. So the government would never do anything to hurt a peeple.
While an investor would of course kill anyone for a penny, if they could get away with it.
On the post: Air Force, Lockheed Martin Combine Forces To 'Lose' 100,000 Inspector General Investigations
Heads need to roll
1 - Lockheed, a major defense contractor with decades of experience with computers and IT systems, for 12 years running, failed to backup or check their backups of a critical USAF system needed to verify USAF compliance with law.
or,
2 - The system was deliberately corrupted to cover up criminal activity.
It's hard to tell which is more likely.
Either way, heads need to roll. Every person in the management chain responsible for this debacle needs to be fired, from the CEO on down.
How many millions did the Pentagon pay Lockheed to screw this up?
On the post: DailyDirt: Moonshot 2.0
Daunting regulatory approval? On the moon?
But once you're in space, I don't think there are any regulations or approvals needed to do stuff on the moon.
Not yet, anyway.
I think there's a UN treaty that says countries are liable for any damages caused by space missions launched from their territory (even if private).
So before a private company can launch, they have to satisfy their government that it's not too risky (or at least buy insurance).
But nobody lives on the moon. Nobody has any legal right to tell you what to do there - if you can mange to get there.
On the post: Google's Arbitrary Morality Police Threaten Us Yet Again; Media Sites Probably Shouldn't Use Google Ads
Re: Re: "Any normal, living, thinking human being"
If you want customer service, you can get it. It costs $5 a month.
On the post: Google's Arbitrary Morality Police Threaten Us Yet Again; Media Sites Probably Shouldn't Use Google Ads
"Any normal, living, thinking human being"
This is Google we're talking about.
I can't believe I'm the first to point this out, but Google is an AI company.
Almost certainly the notices were generated by an AI algorithm that read the posting and/or followed the links.
Of course. But probably no person made any such conclusion.
Just think about how many ads they host, on how many websites. Do you really believe they have human beings checking them all for content violations?
They can't possibly.
There are two Googles:
* Google the AI
* Google the corporation that builds and maintains the AI
On the post: New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800
Re: Re:
If you don't want any risk in life, stay in bed, in a locked room, surrounded by armed troops.
You know, like a prison.
On the post: Concussion Protocol: Can You Tell The Difference Between Soda And One Half Of A Football Team?
Re: Re: They might have a small point if....
Even worse, Dr. Pepper's lawyers are working directly against the best interest of their employer.
If the Broncos use the term "Orange Crush" that's essentially FREE ADVERTISING for the soda.
If the lawyers cared more about helping their employer than expanding their own fiefdom, they'd encourage the Broncos to use the term.
On the post: Supreme Court Just Made It Easier For Patent Trolls
Re: Another example of ignorance being beneficial
When I worked in the R&D group at a large technology company, that is exactly what the lawyers told us.
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
This happens becuase cops are cowards
If they had any balls, they'd have gone inside and arrested the guy.
But that might involve some risk.
Or, they could have just waited the guy out. But that would be boring and tedious.
So, let's destroy a completely innocent citizen's house.
On the post: New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800
Re:
It's their own fault for not having the balls to just publish without asking permission.
That is how fair use is supposed to work.
Next >>