No, the whole point of fair use is that it is use that doesn't require permission. What the NYT is doing here is straight-up extortion: they're saying "pay us this money or pay your lawyers more money to make your fair use claim in court". That you would win isn't relevant to the financial potency of this threat.
By preventing publishers from identifying repeat visitors and making these offers to them, content blockers harm consumers.
I actively choose to prevent tracking as much as possible, largely because of pervasive ad-related tracking. Am I harming myself? If so, isn't that my right?
This sort of argument always irritates me because it betrays a fundamental misconception that advertising agencies just can't seem to disabuse themselves of: that targeted advertising is a benefit to the people being advertised to.
It is not. It is a benefit to advertisers and advertisers alone. It is a cost to everyone else.
Re: Re: Re: Our unchanging business models need you!
Wow.
I stopped watching broadcast TV when they started putting those animated promo banners for other shows over the top of shows. It made the viewing experience simply too irritating to enjoy, no matter how good the show may be. I simply can't imagine how anyone could tolerate what you describe for more than half a second.
No. "Fair market value" would mean that the homeowner would still be suffering an enormous loss. The city should, at a minimum, provide the replacement cost for the property destroyed and for the denial of the use of the property prior to replacement.
I'm curious -- what do you think the legitimate role for war-making equipment is when it comes to law enforcement? This is an honest question, because I don't see one at all.
Insurance companies are no answer to this. Even if they don't fight paying the claim (ha!), the money paid very rarely comes close to making you whole.
An aging rock star who is at least as famous for being a total dick as for his music is acting like a total dick when people tease him for being an aging rock star?
"There is a place for IOT, but I think (at least for the near future) it is much smaller than many companies want it to be."
This.
The hype has successfully confused two completely different things: networked things and cloud-connected things. Almost everything that is being hyped as IoT is the latter.
The fact is that being cloud-connected improves almost none of these things in any significant way. All it does is provide a rather significant data leak.
Networked things, however, are a different story. If you lived in an environment where the devices you interacted with could be coordinated to fit your lifestyle -- without connected to the internet or subjecting you to spying by service providers -- that would be a huge, huge benefit.
That market, however, is deliberately being completely ignored in favor of IoT for the sole reason that IoT provides a greater profit potential through datamining.
"This case is no different. The government screwed up."
If the thing they "screwed up" was that they got caught engaging in obviously nefarious behavior, then you're correct.
However, the actual nefarious behavior itself was not a screwup. It was a deliberate, systemic policy that predates this particular case. That's not a mistake. That's systemic corruption.
I agree. In practice, if we don't treat the appearance of impropriety as something pretty much as bad as impropriety itself, this avenue for corruption will continue to grow.
"just not sure how cost effective a generator would be as a backup to a solar system."
A friend of mine has his house completely disconnected from the electrical grid. Here's his experience with the cost of the backup generator.
First, he does not go out of his way to avoid using electricity -- he has and uses all the appliances you'd expect, although his water heater and stove are propane-powered, not electric.
He is using two solar panels for his electricity. I forget their output, but they are undersized for what he's doing. He also runs a propane-powered backup generator with a large, fixed propane tank (like you see at gas stations). His tank lasts him a little over a year, and costs around $1,000 to fill.
He computed that adding two more panels would reduce his propane usage by about 30%.
Re: Google and Facebook are probably the most scary
"Google on the other hand, is nearly impossible to avoid."
This is entirely untrue. There is nothing that offers the convenience of Google services, that's true -- but you can do almost all the same things without Google as you can with. Especially things like calendaring, email, maps, etc.
There are not many judicial precedents as illogical, ill-advised, and obviously unconstitutional as the third party doctrine as it is currently conceived.
The right interpretation: data held about me by a third party can be voluntarily relinquished by that third party without violating the Constitution (although doing so could violate a contractual agreement). When the government forces the disclosure without a warrant, the Constitution is clearly and obviously being violated.
The current interpretation: the government has access to anything they want without a warrant as long as they don't get it directly from you. It's corrosive nonsense.
On the post: New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800
Re:
They made a cold financial calculation. It's cheaper to pay the extortion money to the NYT than to hire lawyers to defend themselves in court.
It's as simple as that.
On the post: New York Times Says Fair Use Of 300 Words Will Run You About $1800
Re:
On the post: Newspaper Association Thinks FTC Should Force Readers To Be Subject To Godawful Ads And Invasive Trackers
Weird definition of "harm"
I actively choose to prevent tracking as much as possible, largely because of pervasive ad-related tracking. Am I harming myself? If so, isn't that my right?
This sort of argument always irritates me because it betrays a fundamental misconception that advertising agencies just can't seem to disabuse themselves of: that targeted advertising is a benefit to the people being advertised to.
It is not. It is a benefit to advertisers and advertisers alone. It is a cost to everyone else.
On the post: Newspaper Association Thinks FTC Should Force Readers To Be Subject To Godawful Ads And Invasive Trackers
Re: Re: Re: Our unchanging business models need you!
I stopped watching broadcast TV when they started putting those animated promo banners for other shows over the top of shows. It made the viewing experience simply too irritating to enjoy, no matter how good the show may be. I simply can't imagine how anyone could tolerate what you describe for more than half a second.
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
Re:
No. "Fair market value" would mean that the homeowner would still be suffering an enormous loss. The city should, at a minimum, provide the replacement cost for the property destroyed and for the denial of the use of the property prior to replacement.
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
Re: Re: Military tech doesn't belong with police.
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
Re: Re:
True. And common sense says that you should never call them, period. They are too dangerous and often provide little to no actual help.
On the post: Homeowner Sues Police After Pursuit Of Shoplifter Leaves Him With No Home To Own
And the cops wonder why
And yet the cops continue to wonder why so many people consider them to be one of the biggest threats around.
On the post: Web Sheriff Accuses Us Of Breaking Basically Every Possible Law For Pointing Out That It's Abusing DMCA Takedowns
Re: Re: NEW KEYBOARD
On the post: Axl Rose DMCAs Unflattering Photo For Which He Doesn't Hold The Copyright
Let me get this straight...
Sounds about right.
On the post: Nest May Be The First Major Casualty Of Hollow 'Internet Of Things' Hype
Re: IOT is overhyped
This.
The hype has successfully confused two completely different things: networked things and cloud-connected things. Almost everything that is being hyped as IoT is the latter.
The fact is that being cloud-connected improves almost none of these things in any significant way. All it does is provide a rather significant data leak.
Networked things, however, are a different story. If you lived in an environment where the devices you interacted with could be coordinated to fit your lifestyle -- without connected to the internet or subjecting you to spying by service providers -- that would be a huge, huge benefit.
That market, however, is deliberately being completely ignored in favor of IoT for the sole reason that IoT provides a greater profit potential through datamining.
On the post: FBI, Prosecutors Given Copies Of Defense Documents By Duplication Service Defense Was Instructed To Use
Re:
If the thing they "screwed up" was that they got caught engaging in obviously nefarious behavior, then you're correct.
However, the actual nefarious behavior itself was not a screwup. It was a deliberate, systemic policy that predates this particular case. That's not a mistake. That's systemic corruption.
On the post: FBI, Prosecutors Given Copies Of Defense Documents By Duplication Service Defense Was Instructed To Use
Re: No impropriety since the FBI already had the documents
Whether or not the documents revealed anything new has absolutely nothing to do with whether or not the means to obtain them was corrupt.
See this case as an example.
On the post: FBI, Prosecutors Given Copies Of Defense Documents By Duplication Service Defense Was Instructed To Use
Re:
On the post: Court Says MuckRock Must Take Down Smart Grid Company's Documents Because Judge Has 'No Time' To Review Case Properly
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Court Says MuckRock Must Take Down Smart Grid Company's Documents Because Judge Has 'No Time' To Review Case Properly
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
A friend of mine has his house completely disconnected from the electrical grid. Here's his experience with the cost of the backup generator.
First, he does not go out of his way to avoid using electricity -- he has and uses all the appliances you'd expect, although his water heater and stove are propane-powered, not electric.
He is using two solar panels for his electricity. I forget their output, but they are undersized for what he's doing. He also runs a propane-powered backup generator with a large, fixed propane tank (like you see at gas stations). His tank lasts him a little over a year, and costs around $1,000 to fill.
He computed that adding two more panels would reduce his propane usage by about 30%.
On the post: Anonymized Data Really Isn't Anonymous: Vehicle Data Can Easily Be Used To Identify You
Re: Google and Facebook are probably the most scary
This is entirely untrue. There is nothing that offers the convenience of Google services, that's true -- but you can do almost all the same things without Google as you can with. Especially things like calendaring, email, maps, etc.
On the post: Anonymized Data Really Isn't Anonymous: Vehicle Data Can Easily Be Used To Identify You
Re: Anonymization turns out to be a VERY difficult problem
In other words, actual anonymization can only be achieved with true aggregation, discarding the original unaggregated records.
That dramatically limits the analysis that can be done with large data sets. That's why they continue to pretend that anonymization works.
On the post: 4th Circuit Appeals Court Rolls Back Its Warrant Requirement For Cell Site Location Info
Not many
The right interpretation: data held about me by a third party can be voluntarily relinquished by that third party without violating the Constitution (although doing so could violate a contractual agreement). When the government forces the disclosure without a warrant, the Constitution is clearly and obviously being violated.
The current interpretation: the government has access to anything they want without a warrant as long as they don't get it directly from you. It's corrosive nonsense.
Next >>