ISPs have the ability to remove the offending content from the net, and as such, the DMCA should clearly apply to them.
You're lazy twits, always blaming others for not fixing your problem. It's like you're blaming whoever built the roadways for letting bank robbers get to your vault! Go after the infringer who's putting it on the net, not the ISPs that are just doing their job.
You're a whining crybaby. Quit your whining and fix your problem. We shouldn't have to care about your problem, and *our* elected representatives shouldn't be mangling whole countries' judicial systems just to satisfy your witch hunting perversions!
Boycott MafiAA! Starve the bastards into oblivion!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Elsevier supports content mining, contra your salacious headline
More like insisting that access to a publisher's copy be unfettered,
You mean insisting that access to research done by scientists and paid for by tuition and grants from taxpayers and philanthropists should be unfettered? I fail to see why anyone needs to suffer the likes of Elsevier sticking their rapaciously greedy, self-entitled noses in there. They've long overstayed their welcome.
... remember, this isn't about downloading, it's about seeding / sharing.
Which is how torrenting works. You know, multiple streams coming/going to/from multiple systems sharing the load, minimizing the stress on all involved? If you idiots weren't such luddites (or dogs in a manger) you'd see the value in it and might even learn to use it profitably. But no, you don't understand any of it so you hate it.
You're just butt hurt that Congress is so incompetent they couldn't write the law you paid for. You should demand your money back until they cough up the one you wanted.
Exercise your imaginations. America is going to show you bottoms you don't know existed.
Watching what we (or our fathers) did in the 20th century, I no longer believe there's a bottom. We're infinitely capable of way worse than what we've done so far. Pol Pot showed us the way. Mao and the Red Guard, and a few south American dictatorships proved it's very repeatable. Humans can be very creative, even when we're reaching for the bottom of what's physically or intellectually possible. Think Auschwitz or Bergen Belsen, or Sobibor. Then there's Stalin and Beria et al, depravity personified. Oh yeah, we can go even lower. Try us.
The US is just getting started on this road. Imagine what 21st century technology can come up with building upon what we learned last century.
Ah! It would appear the little "shot over the bow" by the Five Eyes has indeed worked its coercive magic and turned the Froggies into good little non-english, dues-paying minions, willing to do whatever the Five Eyes demands to prevent future "terrorist" attacks.
Methinks you've forgotten a bit of history you shouldn't have.
Napoleonic law: guilty until proven innocent. Also, France used to own Syria. Now they want it back. DeGaulle: go piss up a rope NATO! France was also very communist during USSR days (easily bought by the KGB folding money). Personally, I think that both the US and Britain went way overboard in their hatred of communists. France wasn't alone in not hating them. Both Italy and Greece agreed with them.
They don't play nicely with the other children. They also couldn't give a flying !#$ if we don't like it.
I swear, our human-rights oriented western governments are like a bunch of binge drunks ...
Human rights and individual freedoms are *so* last century. Please, try to keep up. We're bingeing on fascism and tyranny so far this century. It's what's fashionable today, don't you know? Think Nazi Brownshirts, Einsatzgruppen and stormtroopers, bullets in the backs of heads (Beria and Butcher of Lyon), burning down the Reichstag, mass graves, yada, yada.
It's so predictable how politicians react to acts of terror--behaving exactly the way the terrorists want them to.
Ivan Pavlov's giggling his head off. Such suckers. Easy money. I am amazed at its staying power. 9/11, then pretty much nothing really except for incremental boosts/reminders, and the whole civilized world shakes in their boots continually. Good job, for so little invested.
... but I can actually see a small bit of value in this concept, *if* it is used as intended, to squash "public" sites for recruitment and/or glorifying terrorist actions. It would reduce the number of kids/teens/young adults that are exposed to their crap ...
Funny, but that's what I expect parents to do for their children. You know, educate them on things that are stupid and destructive? As in, don't go there, there's only death there, who needs that crap?
I blame their parents for having failed their children's education! Lazy sluggards.
Define "authoritarian" state. USSR, Nazi Germany, WWII Imperial Japan, East Germany (a la Stasi), Franco's fascist Spain, Mussolini's Italy, or 21st century USA?
I could go on. Lots of Australians consider their gov't authoritarian. The British certainly do. Then there's Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Burma/Myanmar, lots of African and east European or Asian (former USSR) that fit. I haven't even touched south or central America yet.
The times, they are a changin'. That word's about lost all meaning in this century.
Focusing on censorship rather than tracking simply drives those conversations and efforts underground where they can still be used to influence people, but where it's much harder for government and law enforcement ot keep track of what's being said.
Ah, c'mon. Everybody knows they get their best Intel these days from Facebook & Twitter. Stupid terrorists.
France, like China, doesn't have a 1st amendment. They're both old world and prize stability and peaceful control over individual freedom. Who's right? That's yet to be determined, but they're both a lot older than us.
Specifically the Minister of the Interior will be given the power to block any website that is deemed to be "promoting terrorism or inciting terrorist acts."
So, France just blackholed the US gov't? Cool! :-) This should be fun.
Re: Re: This is a worst practice in mail system engineering
OK, who's been shaking the stereotype tree? Something just fell out of it.
Yeah, my guess is they've never run an email server. Even for a single person box on a dynamic IP, there's a lot of stuff to come up to speed on. For something like thousands, or tens of thousands, of users it gets real complicated fast when you've multiple versions of Microsoft and Apple and Linux/*BSD coming in using anything from beige box '386 through 64 bit or Android/iBauble.
Add in POPn, IMAP, clamav, procmail, personal taste, TLS, your ISP's Smarthost wants you to connect using port $blah, and where do you stick your ISP password in what file to enable transmission, and which email server are you running (they all do it differently in frustrating, very educational ways)?
If you use Chrome, you'll get that warning if you attempt to visit a site that has been flagged as a malware distributor. This is a good thing.
Well yeah, if you're foolish enough to still be running Microsoft software. Maybe Apple too; I don't know since I've been running Linux & *BSD since ca. '93.
If you send out an email with a link to a malware site, and you did, and google warns people that your email contains links to malware sites ...
Let me re-word that for you:
If you send out an email with a link to a malware site which doesn't exist ... and google warns people that your email contains links to malware sites then mangles the living daylights out of your mail for no good reason ...
They found one bad link, so they disabled every link. All it would've taken was a "ping -c 1 $IP_ADDRESS"
Re: So you want everyone to build there own email server?
99.5 of the people that use the internet these days are clueless F#@&s. I do NOT want them building email servers. The servers will become spambots, or worse.
Sure, yet a lot of the spam I get comes from gmail users. How 'bout that? You'd think something as big as Google could police their spammer problem, yes? It's not that simple. Spammers are the Internet's cancer, explosive destructive growth any time you close your eyes for a couple of winks.
I don't blame Google for this. I blame the assholes who sell spamming services to clueless users ("get rich quick!").
On the post: Judge Mocks Public Interest Concerns About Kicking People Off Internet, Tells Cox It's Not Protected By The DMCA
Re: Re: Re:
You're lazy twits, always blaming others for not fixing your problem. It's like you're blaming whoever built the roadways for letting bank robbers get to your vault! Go after the infringer who's putting it on the net, not the ISPs that are just doing their job.
You're a whining crybaby. Quit your whining and fix your problem. We shouldn't have to care about your problem, and *our* elected representatives shouldn't be mangling whole countries' judicial systems just to satisfy your witch hunting perversions!
Boycott MafiAA! Starve the bastards into oblivion!
On the post: Elsevier Says Downloading And Content-Mining Licensed Copies Of Research Papers 'Could Be Considered' Stealing
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Elsevier supports content mining, contra your salacious headline
You mean insisting that access to research done by scientists and paid for by tuition and grants from taxpayers and philanthropists should be unfettered? I fail to see why anyone needs to suffer the likes of Elsevier sticking their rapaciously greedy, self-entitled noses in there. They've long overstayed their welcome.
On the post: Judge Mocks Public Interest Concerns About Kicking People Off Internet, Tells Cox It's Not Protected By The DMCA
Re: "I see no problem barring someone from using the phone on accusations alone, they can always write."
On the post: Judge Mocks Public Interest Concerns About Kicking People Off Internet, Tells Cox It's Not Protected By The DMCA
Re:
Which is how torrenting works. You know, multiple streams coming/going to/from multiple systems sharing the load, minimizing the stress on all involved? If you idiots weren't such luddites (or dogs in a manger) you'd see the value in it and might even learn to use it profitably. But no, you don't understand any of it so you hate it.
You're just butt hurt that Congress is so incompetent they couldn't write the law you paid for. You should demand your money back until they cough up the one you wanted.
Boycott MafiAA!
On the post: Hillary Clinton Joins The 'Make Silicon Valley Break Encryption' Bandwagon
Re: Bottom America
Watching what we (or our fathers) did in the 20th century, I no longer believe there's a bottom. We're infinitely capable of way worse than what we've done so far. Pol Pot showed us the way. Mao and the Red Guard, and a few south American dictatorships proved it's very repeatable. Humans can be very creative, even when we're reaching for the bottom of what's physically or intellectually possible. Think Auschwitz or Bergen Belsen, or Sobibor. Then there's Stalin and Beria et al, depravity personified. Oh yeah, we can go even lower. Try us.
The US is just getting started on this road. Imagine what 21st century technology can come up with building upon what we learned last century.
Depressed yet? :-| Sucks to be our children.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re: The Fear Train. Right on schedule.
Methinks you've forgotten a bit of history you shouldn't have.
Napoleonic law: guilty until proven innocent. Also, France used to own Syria. Now they want it back. DeGaulle: go piss up a rope NATO! France was also very communist during USSR days (easily bought by the KGB folding money). Personally, I think that both the US and Britain went way overboard in their hatred of communists. France wasn't alone in not hating them. Both Italy and Greece agreed with them.
They don't play nicely with the other children. They also couldn't give a flying !#$ if we don't like it.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re: Binge time
Human rights and individual freedoms are *so* last century. Please, try to keep up. We're bingeing on fascism and tyranny so far this century. It's what's fashionable today, don't you know? Think Nazi Brownshirts, Einsatzgruppen and stormtroopers, bullets in the backs of heads (Beria and Butcher of Lyon), burning down the Reichstag, mass graves, yada, yada.
It'll be fun! :-P
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re:
Ivan Pavlov's giggling his head off. Such suckers. Easy money. I am amazed at its staying power. 9/11, then pretty much nothing really except for incremental boosts/reminders, and the whole civilized world shakes in their boots continually. Good job, for so little invested.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re: What's next
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re: Devil's Advocate
Funny, but that's what I expect parents to do for their children. You know, educate them on things that are stupid and destructive? As in, don't go there, there's only death there, who needs that crap?
I blame their parents for having failed their children's education! Lazy sluggards.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re:
I love the way you slur "Masnick". I can almost see the spittle dripping off your moustache from here. Breath. Breathe.
Funny guy.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Re: Re:
Define "authoritarian" state. USSR, Nazi Germany, WWII Imperial Japan, East Germany (a la Stasi), Franco's fascist Spain, Mussolini's Italy, or 21st century USA?
I could go on. Lots of Australians consider their gov't authoritarian. The British certainly do. Then there's Singapore, Malaysia, Indonesia, Burma/Myanmar, lots of African and east European or Asian (former USSR) that fit. I haven't even touched south or central America yet.
The times, they are a changin'. That word's about lost all meaning in this century.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
Ah, c'mon. Everybody knows they get their best Intel these days from Facebook & Twitter. Stupid terrorists.
France, like China, doesn't have a 1st amendment. They're both old world and prize stability and peaceful control over individual freedom. Who's right? That's yet to be determined, but they're both a lot older than us.
Aside, "enforcement ot keep"? Fat fingers R us.
On the post: France Responds To Paris Attacks By Rushing Through Internet Censorship Law
"promoting terrorism or inciting terrorist acts"
So, France just blackholed the US gov't? Cool! :-) This should be fun.
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: Re: This is a worst practice in mail system engineering
Yeah, my guess is they've never run an email server. Even for a single person box on a dynamic IP, there's a lot of stuff to come up to speed on. For something like thousands, or tens of thousands, of users it gets real complicated fast when you've multiple versions of Microsoft and Apple and Linux/*BSD coming in using anything from beige box '386 through 64 bit or Android/iBauble.
Add in POPn, IMAP, clamav, procmail, personal taste, TLS, your ISP's Smarthost wants you to connect using port $blah, and where do you stick your ISP password in what file to enable transmission, and which email server are you running (they all do it differently in frustrating, very educational ways)?
Life.
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: I didn't see that message
Just rhetorical. Something you might like to consider. :-)
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: Re: Welcome to nanny-net
Well yeah, if you're foolish enough to still be running Microsoft software. Maybe Apple too; I don't know since I've been running Linux & *BSD since ca. '93.
I've never felt the need to use Chrome. YMMV.
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: DUH!
Let me re-word that for you:
They found one bad link, so they disabled every link. All it would've taken was a "ping -c 1 $IP_ADDRESS"
Maybe that's in the next version.
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: Re:
On the post: Gmail Takes A Sledgehammer To The Techdirt Daily Newsletter When Not Even A Scalpel Is Needed
Re: So you want everyone to build there own email server?
Sure, yet a lot of the spam I get comes from gmail users. How 'bout that? You'd think something as big as Google could police their spammer problem, yes? It's not that simple. Spammers are the Internet's cancer, explosive destructive growth any time you close your eyes for a couple of winks.
I don't blame Google for this. I blame the assholes who sell spamming services to clueless users ("get rich quick!").
Next >>