What I find curious about the folks you call "religious zealots" is that they don't realize that a church, mosque, temple or synagogue is a place that pedophiles would be attracted to. As are schools. As is organized sports. There are lots of children around, you see, and they get to operate, or at least hope to operate, below the radar there.
As for catch all laws, sex offender registries and all the rest I'm not at all sure that children are any better protected. Particularly given all of the above.
And given that the vast majority of child sexual abuse occurs in family, and a lower amount through trusted adults in places like the above and then, finally, pedophiles acting alone.
I've done a lot of research on this subject in my recovery from sexual abuse that I suffered at the hands of my father. And in family, by a parent, is where most abuse happens. Period, full stop.
I disagree that most "religious zealots" rejoice with each upping of the penalties or that most are willfully blind, even though their leadership certainly is. The upper echelons of the Roman Catholic Church certainly is as well, though I'd argue that most Catholic's aren't. In the case of the RC's what's happening is denial which is common enough in situations like this. Though, in my opinion, it's long past time the RC's upper echelons just accepted the fact that this has and will happen. Which doesn't mean they stop guarding against it.
I'm writing this, also, as a devout Anglican so being in a religious community doesn't equal zealotry.
In fact, Jesus warned against and had no use for the zealotry of his time. And we shouldn't have a use for it in our time. From politicians or anyone else.
You can't have little children playing doctor, now can you? Or expressing and playing out their natural curiosity about male and female bodies. (Note that I didn't say acting out.)
We've long since past the point of paranoia about the safety of our children where, as a society, we want to raise them in a bubble of alleged safety.
Drive them to school, to sports activities, keep them organized, do everything but let them be children and let them play with each other. And, no, not only doctor but unorganized, adult absent play that allows children to learn from play about the journey of life they're on.
Strangely enough, as adults, we drive them off to schools, organized sports, church and other activities where the tiny proportion of adult pedophiles will be present because of the access to children. (Real pedophiles are something like 0.1% or less of the adult population.) And then we're outraged when something happens.
OK, so ban these people from playing online games through XBox and other devices, even though the majority of sex offenders aren't guilty of hunting children. As has been pointed out a large number of people on the sex offender registries are innocent in the sense that both parties consented even if both parties are under age.
You don't even have to go to that extreme to get why he was prosecuted and it would have had little or nothing to do with hacking (more properly cracking) but almost all to do with his employment contract. It's standard in any employment contract that an employee treat most documents they see as confidential unless expressly tagged as public. And very few are. Data an employee has access to in the normal course of their job is to be treated the same.
Nothing in the post indicates that he went around security features of the corporate network only that he took data with him to his new employer something he could have off-loaded onto a thumb drive or whatever or, even foolishly, zipped up and emailed home.
None of that involves going beyond his normal access except that he took it home to show to his new employer which, until he walks out the door for the last time, breaks his employment contract and his duty of confidentiality.
He didn't have to crack anything to get the data. So what's popularly called "hacking" never enters into it. It sounds more romantic to call it "hacking" but for the most part these sorts of things don't involve that.
How's about they're two completely different subjects. One is an, as yet unproven, charge of copyright infringement against Megaupload and the seizure of the site.
This is about a taxpayer funded public security agency that has yet to prove that it's done much of anything it was set up to do and costs an arm and several legs to keep going. Not only that but it's had 200 or more theft allegations against it and it's employees, selectively screens by all reports and can't even keep objects off aircraft that it's supposed to that the old method of metal detectors would have intercepted. All of which is on the record.
I'm inclined to believe that it could be done more efficiently and for less privately rather than by this lot.
Taxpayers do deserve and have a right to expect a bang for their buck not incompetence which is what TSA is being shown as being. The two are completely different.
"Basically, add another lock to your door, and don't worry about the lawlessness outside. Don't worry about the gangs running the street who are trying to break into your house all the time, just lock the door tighter and hope like hell they don't get in and kill you."
What worries me, more than Anonymous' political leanings or occasional childishness is that the sites they successfully attack don't have the resilience to withstand what is now a fairly basic and well understood attack which is the DDOS and variants thereof. It simply isn't all that hard. So it's not another lock I'm looking for it's ONE lock, a fairly basic one. It isn't that hard to do which leads me to question the security of the rest of the site and what's behind it.
I disagree with your idea that busting one or two "leaders" of Anonymous is much of, or any, deterrent to further attacks by the group. There is a lot in their protests that I do agree with even if they are, often, childish. Still, keep in mind that arrests and whacking people across the skull with nightsticks didn't put an end to the civil rights movement in the 1950s through 70s or the peace movement of the 1960s or 1970s.
When the state over reacts to a legitimate protest movement which, I suggest, they have here it comes back to bite their arse and hard. I'd suggest that's what will happen here because a number of Anonymous' grievances are legitimate, in my mind.
I'm quite prepared to let Bringer's statements stand on their own and not just let the immediate past influence how I respond. The proof, as they say, is in the pudding. We'll see how he goes from here.
I know a great number of otherwise tech smart and well informed people who haven't the slightest idea of how the Internet works. Largely because they don't encounter the finer points of it in their day to day work. So I'm not surprised that people like Bringer don't/didn't know what mess of things that DNS blocking would bring. I've worked with a few people like that and trying to explain to them that the Internet isn't ethernet is often like trying to herd cats.
So we worked for the MPAA? People have been know to change their minds and change sides in a debate like SOPA/PIPA (round 1) which is what's happened here. Look hard enough at anyone and you'll find some sort of taint on them. It's called life and what humans do well in life is learn.
Re: Harmed? I'm not harmed by rich artists. I'm made happier
It would be lovely, bob, old buddy, old pal if you could do more than simply rewrite the same post over and over again.
That and your obsession with $100 million movies. Get off that, already!
And just where in the U.S.Constitution do you find mention of spreading costs around so that bob can go to a movie? Or the predecessor in the UK known as The Statue of Anne. And what makes you think, for a moment, that studios and theatres will charge the same price for the blockbuster as they will for the failure? Doesn't happen.
Get this into your head. Monopolies by their very nature lead to higher costs, less innovation and invention than competition and challenge do. That applies to the MPAA and RIAA members as much as it does to anyone else.
Copyright (and patents for that matter) were never intended to stretch into eternity as some US Courts and lawmakers seem to want them to. They are, if anything, short term rewards for the act of creation. Creation, incidentally, that would continue in the absence of copyright and patent law. It's something we humans do. We create and write stories. We create and develop better ways of doing things that may copy components of the older solution but are themselves new works
You'd still get your $100 million movie full of CGI effects and explosions, sex, drugs and rock'n'roll with or without copyright. You'll still get people inventing useful things. The purpose of copyright and patents in the USA is to promote the useful arts and sciences not to guarantee some suit in a record company office who can't tell an obobe from an electric bass an income. Universal, remember, hired a failed distilling company executive to run their show. (The rest of his family fired him.)
And we may even get better LOL Cat videos, too!
Though I doubt we'll ever get bob to stop copying bob.
The original IE was pretty much Mosaic wrapped in new clothes and foisted on us as something "new and improved" which only goes to show that what works for selling detergents seems to work just as well for "selling" software!
While the act of publishing and its costs have declined AND it's been made easier by blogs and desktop publishing programs it's important to remember that the act of taking, for example, a book, and publishing it to the web is a creative act. Beginning with banning, forever, Arial and Times New Roman type. ;-)
Beginning with type face, then going onto the layout (different for poetry than prose than a news article or blog) the positioning of whatever illustrations the author wants to include. It's a lot of work.
Right from understanding that most web pages are more readable using a sans-serif font the the one this post will be be in than a serif font like Times New Roman. The squiggly bits on a serif font aren't decoration they're there to guide the eye on a printed page full of dense text. So the publisher, be it the author or the person the author is working with to self publish need to know the target media be it a web page, the printed page or a PDF or other format simply for type selection.
What's happening now, is a shift away from the gatekeepers to the creators themselves and becoming a process the creators can control and guide and THEN it's done at the push of a button. But do keep in mind that what we call "publishing" is, itself, a creative act.
So much of what passes for airport (and cruise ship) security is "theatre". X-Rays and scanners ought only to confirm what a well trained agent should notice anyway, that there's something not right about the passenger that goes beyond a nervous flyer. Things like unable to make eye contact, a high level of anxiety and a number of other signs that there's something wrong with this person.
The size of a screen on laptop or pad computer don't enter into it. Yes, it's possible that you can pack an explosive in a laptop or iPad though only by making them essentially useless. In most cases there would also be some evidence of wide spread tampering which someone would need to do to remove the motherboard and pack in explosives such as broken seals.
Mostly, though, it's just for show. A well trained and well informed terrorist such as the ones who struck on 9/11 will know, in detail, about security measures and the best ways of circumventing them. As did a group of Sikh separatists based in Canada who didn't even board the planes. The bombs, with timers, went on as luggage and then the terrorists simply didn't bother to get on the flights.
Nothing is 100% but TSA isn't concerned with that as much as they're concerned with the theatre around boarding a plane which will convince people that it is 100%. Until, heaven forbid, the next time.
The comments indicate a couple of things, as I read them.
First the people at the table are far from idiots. What they want is control which is what TPP seems set to give them. It's what they wanted with ACTA but couldn't get.
Second the people at the table don't, in any way, represent artists. It makes for wonderful PR, the specter of starving artists in a grotto somewhere creating music, stories, movies, sculpture and so on plays well with certain constituencies, notably politicians and culture mavens. In the meantime artists continue to be forced, effectively, to sign over their copyrights to publishers, recording companies and their assorted hangers on, movie companies and even your letter to the editor. Or posts on blogs, even.
Far more often than not the creator gets little for their work after all the Hollywood creative accounting gets done with them. More likely for a new act, author and so on, they'll end up owing money.
The artist doesn't count, free speech doesn't count, not even culture counts in the end all that counts is the rights holders profits and their ability to control the gates.
For once, I'm happy that Canada isn't at the table. Unlike ACTA that means we don't automatically have to comply with the worst of it. Seems there's a use for supply management in dairy and eggs after all!
Nothing so much amazes me as the truth that those who forget history are doomed to repeat it.
WIPO's attitude reminds me more the the appeasers in Britain, France and the isolationist United States in the years leading up to 1939. For example Henry Ford's insistence that trading with Nazi Germany was a good thing. Even to the point of supplying them with things like aircraft engines that had no other use than military ones. Right, "peace in our time".
WIPO supplies the most oppressive regime on the planet with modern computers and the networking so that they will work well in the vague hope that somehow that will make them IP extremists like WIPO has become.
Now we have a document that outlines all of this "collaboration" in detail. In the vague hope that a regime that doesn't get close to respecting "intellectual property", in fact it ignores it, copies, disassembles it, takes it and does what it will with it. A country whose government is the very definition of what IP extremists like to call "piracy".
Somehow appeasing them with this installation will magically get them to respect "intellectual property" and, hold your breath, respect it. Not only that but with similar white magic they will open the country to the Internet, stop testing nuclear weapons and long range missiles capable of carrying such weapons.
I have to assume that the chronic food shortages and starvation in North Korea will similarly come to a magical end.
The parallels are astonishing. Not that North Korea is capable of triggering World War 3. Though they are more than capable of starting a horrific nuclear exchange. And now, with spanking new equipment and advice from the best "pirates" WIPO can round up, far better able to do so.
These parallels came to me as I was reading through some of the causes of WW2 and reading through the linked PDF in Mike's post.
Even of the worst doesn't happen I do want to know what megaupload translates to in Korean. You can bet your bottom dollar that project will be one of the first they set up after WIPO's technical advisers (or pirates, if you would) go home.
Put mildly it's insane. Less mildly it's fcukin' insane.
So much for respect for UN sanctions on Korea, or any other rogue state, now that this UN agency reads them to mean that it applies to anyone but us.
And keep this in mind, IP extremist trolls, bob and others who want to complain about this site or piracy in general. WIPO didn't just take the genie out of the bottle. They broke the damned bottle.
WIPO doesn't think "intellectual property" is all that important. Why should anyone else?
Logically that piracy is both robbing ships and copyright/patent infringement.
By extension that means that all the pirates are from Somalia, even the guy having lunch in the copier. Which must also mean that the IP extremist's top villain Google must also have a large presence in Somalia which is where they hide their nefarious activities on servers squirreled away there.
Now if only Megaupload had done the same thing the site would still be up and running and Dotcom wouldn't be fighting an extradition request.
See, it does all make sense if you only look at it like the bob's and AC's of the world want you and us to look at it.
It might take a night of beer and a truckload of pot brownies to get there but I assure you that it's worth it!
Which only goes to show that you weren't examining the cleavage closely enough in your effort to be politically correct while you were wondering "why are there no girls/women who look and dress like that at MY office"?
I'm sure with your vast experience on P2P networks you'd know about such things, bob.
And no, I don't use the verb "to share" to describe infecting someone with and STD though posts by someone called bob around here tempt me to do so just as soon as I acquire one.
Thing is that it briefly mentions non MS office packages so that's where the piracy comes in. About 3 seconds of it. And that's what one of the high end models working in the office downloaded the infected thumb drive which, it seems, grew legs, jumped off the desk and ran off with her credit card.
It has the potential to be a good ad about personal security at the office and the need for people to be careful about things like credit card numbers and what they take pictures of on copiers and scanners. The problem comes when the ad tries to cover too much ground in 60 seconds. Quite honestly it would have been far more effective as three 20 second ads focusing on each of the three messages they were trying to get out about security.
And then, for some of us anyway, maybe a lot of it, there's the MS tag line off the end which, by itself, can negate a lot of the positive message(s) in the ad.
Not for you but then you apparently need high end models working for you or any of this to happen.
And then there's a identity thief hiding inside every copier and scanner too if only you get the right models. (See above)
Not only that but piracy forces itself into every office, crackers lay in wait at the other end of the WAN and LAN waiting for a nice view of cleavage before downloading malware!
All without most people, it appears, being aware of the dangers out there or in there or somewhere there on the bosses completely unsecured LAN running a Windows server, no doubt. (Not like there's an ad agency in existence that will acknowledge the mere existence of other server OS's.)
I know without reading the article what the ad is trying to say. I'm equally sure that no one over the age of 6 will take it seriously and precious few under that age will.
It's certainly not going convince anyone with it's year old beef stew approach to any of the topics it tries to cover.
On the post: New York Convinces Game Companies To Kick Registered Sex Offenders Off Gaming Services
Re: Re: Re: Double punishment?
As for catch all laws, sex offender registries and all the rest I'm not at all sure that children are any better protected. Particularly given all of the above.
And given that the vast majority of child sexual abuse occurs in family, and a lower amount through trusted adults in places like the above and then, finally, pedophiles acting alone.
I've done a lot of research on this subject in my recovery from sexual abuse that I suffered at the hands of my father. And in family, by a parent, is where most abuse happens. Period, full stop.
I disagree that most "religious zealots" rejoice with each upping of the penalties or that most are willfully blind, even though their leadership certainly is. The upper echelons of the Roman Catholic Church certainly is as well, though I'd argue that most Catholic's aren't. In the case of the RC's what's happening is denial which is common enough in situations like this. Though, in my opinion, it's long past time the RC's upper echelons just accepted the fact that this has and will happen. Which doesn't mean they stop guarding against it.
I'm writing this, also, as a devout Anglican so being in a religious community doesn't equal zealotry.
In fact, Jesus warned against and had no use for the zealotry of his time. And we shouldn't have a use for it in our time. From politicians or anyone else.
On the post: New York Convinces Game Companies To Kick Registered Sex Offenders Off Gaming Services
Re: Re: Thanks for speaking out on this
You can't have little children playing doctor, now can you? Or expressing and playing out their natural curiosity about male and female bodies. (Note that I didn't say acting out.)
We've long since past the point of paranoia about the safety of our children where, as a society, we want to raise them in a bubble of alleged safety.
Drive them to school, to sports activities, keep them organized, do everything but let them be children and let them play with each other. And, no, not only doctor but unorganized, adult absent play that allows children to learn from play about the journey of life they're on.
Strangely enough, as adults, we drive them off to schools, organized sports, church and other activities where the tiny proportion of adult pedophiles will be present because of the access to children. (Real pedophiles are something like 0.1% or less of the adult population.) And then we're outraged when something happens.
OK, so ban these people from playing online games through XBox and other devices, even though the majority of sex offenders aren't guilty of hunting children. As has been pointed out a large number of people on the sex offender registries are innocent in the sense that both parties consented even if both parties are under age.
Over reach anyone?
On the post: No, Violating Your Employer's Computer Use Policy Is Not Criminal Hacking
Re: I do have some issue with this...
Nothing in the post indicates that he went around security features of the corporate network only that he took data with him to his new employer something he could have off-loaded onto a thumb drive or whatever or, even foolishly, zipped up and emailed home.
None of that involves going beyond his normal access except that he took it home to show to his new employer which, until he walks out the door for the last time, breaks his employment contract and his duty of confidentiality.
He didn't have to crack anything to get the data. So what's popularly called "hacking" never enters into it. It sounds more romantic to call it "hacking" but for the most part these sorts of things don't involve that.
On the post: Paramount's Post-SOPA 'Outreach' To Law Students About 'Content Theft' Still Shows An Out Of Touch Operation
Re: Re: copyright math...
On the post: Paramount's Post-SOPA 'Outreach' To Law Students About 'Content Theft' Still Shows An Out Of Touch Operation
Re:
Or a movie like The Ladykillers which Hollywood remade and made a horrible mess of compared to the original with Sir Alec Guiness in it :)
On the post: TSA Security Theater Described In One Simple Infographic
Re: Somebody Should Make And Sell T-Shirts With This
On the post: TSA Security Theater Described In One Simple Infographic
Re:
This is about a taxpayer funded public security agency that has yet to prove that it's done much of anything it was set up to do and costs an arm and several legs to keep going. Not only that but it's had 200 or more theft allegations against it and it's employees, selectively screens by all reports and can't even keep objects off aircraft that it's supposed to that the old method of metal detectors would have intercepted. All of which is on the record.
I'm inclined to believe that it could be done more efficiently and for less privately rather than by this lot.
Taxpayers do deserve and have a right to expect a bang for their buck not incompetence which is what TSA is being shown as being. The two are completely different.
FAIL.
On the post: Overreacting To Anonymous Is A Greater Threat To Freedom, Innovation & Creativity Than Any Of Their Attacks
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
What worries me, more than Anonymous' political leanings or occasional childishness is that the sites they successfully attack don't have the resilience to withstand what is now a fairly basic and well understood attack which is the DDOS and variants thereof. It simply isn't all that hard. So it's not another lock I'm looking for it's ONE lock, a fairly basic one. It isn't that hard to do which leads me to question the security of the rest of the site and what's behind it.
I disagree with your idea that busting one or two "leaders" of Anonymous is much of, or any, deterrent to further attacks by the group. There is a lot in their protests that I do agree with even if they are, often, childish. Still, keep in mind that arrests and whacking people across the skull with nightsticks didn't put an end to the civil rights movement in the 1950s through 70s or the peace movement of the 1960s or 1970s.
When the state over reacts to a legitimate protest movement which, I suggest, they have here it comes back to bite their arse and hard. I'd suggest that's what will happen here because a number of Anonymous' grievances are legitimate, in my mind.
On the post: Former Chief Tech Policy Officer At MPAA Admits That SOPA Was 'Not Compatible With The Health Of The Internet'
I know a great number of otherwise tech smart and well informed people who haven't the slightest idea of how the Internet works. Largely because they don't encounter the finer points of it in their day to day work. So I'm not surprised that people like Bringer don't/didn't know what mess of things that DNS blocking would bring. I've worked with a few people like that and trying to explain to them that the Internet isn't ethernet is often like trying to herd cats.
So we worked for the MPAA? People have been know to change their minds and change sides in a debate like SOPA/PIPA (round 1) which is what's happened here. Look hard enough at anyone and you'll find some sort of taint on them. It's called life and what humans do well in life is learn.
On the post: Yes, Copyright's Sole Purpose Is To Benefit The Public
Re: Harmed? I'm not harmed by rich artists. I'm made happier
That and your obsession with $100 million movies. Get off that, already!
And just where in the U.S.Constitution do you find mention of spreading costs around so that bob can go to a movie? Or the predecessor in the UK known as The Statue of Anne. And what makes you think, for a moment, that studios and theatres will charge the same price for the blockbuster as they will for the failure? Doesn't happen.
Get this into your head. Monopolies by their very nature lead to higher costs, less innovation and invention than competition and challenge do. That applies to the MPAA and RIAA members as much as it does to anyone else.
Copyright (and patents for that matter) were never intended to stretch into eternity as some US Courts and lawmakers seem to want them to. They are, if anything, short term rewards for the act of creation. Creation, incidentally, that would continue in the absence of copyright and patent law. It's something we humans do. We create and write stories. We create and develop better ways of doing things that may copy components of the older solution but are themselves new works
You'd still get your $100 million movie full of CGI effects and explosions, sex, drugs and rock'n'roll with or without copyright. You'll still get people inventing useful things. The purpose of copyright and patents in the USA is to promote the useful arts and sciences not to guarantee some suit in a record company office who can't tell an obobe from an electric bass an income. Universal, remember, hired a failed distilling company executive to run their show. (The rest of his family fired him.)
And we may even get better LOL Cat videos, too!
Though I doubt we'll ever get bob to stop copying bob.
On the post: AOL Sells Its Patents To Microsoft For $1 Billion: Microsoft Now Owns Netscape IP
Re:
On the post: Publishing Isn't A Job Anymore: It's A Button
"Pub"lishing itself is a creative act
Beginning with type face, then going onto the layout (different for poetry than prose than a news article or blog) the positioning of whatever illustrations the author wants to include. It's a lot of work.
Right from understanding that most web pages are more readable using a sans-serif font the the one this post will be be in than a serif font like Times New Roman. The squiggly bits on a serif font aren't decoration they're there to guide the eye on a printed page full of dense text. So the publisher, be it the author or the person the author is working with to self publish need to know the target media be it a web page, the printed page or a PDF or other format simply for type selection.
What's happening now, is a shift away from the gatekeepers to the creators themselves and becoming a process the creators can control and guide and THEN it's done at the push of a button. But do keep in mind that what we call "publishing" is, itself, a creative act.
On the post: Size Matters: Why The TSA Fears Thirteen-Inch Laptops, But Not Eleven-Inch Ones
The size of a screen on laptop or pad computer don't enter into it. Yes, it's possible that you can pack an explosive in a laptop or iPad though only by making them essentially useless. In most cases there would also be some evidence of wide spread tampering which someone would need to do to remove the motherboard and pack in explosives such as broken seals.
Mostly, though, it's just for show. A well trained and well informed terrorist such as the ones who struck on 9/11 will know, in detail, about security measures and the best ways of circumventing them. As did a group of Sikh separatists based in Canada who didn't even board the planes. The bombs, with timers, went on as luggage and then the terrorists simply didn't bother to get on the flights.
Nothing is 100% but TSA isn't concerned with that as much as they're concerned with the theatre around boarding a plane which will convince people that it is 100%. Until, heaven forbid, the next time.
On the post: Where TPP Goes Beyond ACTA -- And How It Shows Us The Future Of IP Enforcement
First the people at the table are far from idiots. What they want is control which is what TPP seems set to give them. It's what they wanted with ACTA but couldn't get.
Second the people at the table don't, in any way, represent artists. It makes for wonderful PR, the specter of starving artists in a grotto somewhere creating music, stories, movies, sculpture and so on plays well with certain constituencies, notably politicians and culture mavens. In the meantime artists continue to be forced, effectively, to sign over their copyrights to publishers, recording companies and their assorted hangers on, movie companies and even your letter to the editor. Or posts on blogs, even.
Far more often than not the creator gets little for their work after all the Hollywood creative accounting gets done with them. More likely for a new act, author and so on, they'll end up owing money.
The artist doesn't count, free speech doesn't count, not even culture counts in the end all that counts is the rights holders profits and their ability to control the gates.
For once, I'm happy that Canada isn't at the table. Unlike ACTA that means we don't automatically have to comply with the worst of it. Seems there's a use for supply management in dairy and eggs after all!
On the post: IP Above All Else: WIPO Defies UN Sanctions To Give Computers To North Korea
WIPO's attitude reminds me more the the appeasers in Britain, France and the isolationist United States in the years leading up to 1939. For example Henry Ford's insistence that trading with Nazi Germany was a good thing. Even to the point of supplying them with things like aircraft engines that had no other use than military ones. Right, "peace in our time".
WIPO supplies the most oppressive regime on the planet with modern computers and the networking so that they will work well in the vague hope that somehow that will make them IP extremists like WIPO has become.
Now we have a document that outlines all of this "collaboration" in detail. In the vague hope that a regime that doesn't get close to respecting "intellectual property", in fact it ignores it, copies, disassembles it, takes it and does what it will with it. A country whose government is the very definition of what IP extremists like to call "piracy".
Somehow appeasing them with this installation will magically get them to respect "intellectual property" and, hold your breath, respect it. Not only that but with similar white magic they will open the country to the Internet, stop testing nuclear weapons and long range missiles capable of carrying such weapons.
I have to assume that the chronic food shortages and starvation in North Korea will similarly come to a magical end.
The parallels are astonishing. Not that North Korea is capable of triggering World War 3. Though they are more than capable of starting a horrific nuclear exchange. And now, with spanking new equipment and advice from the best "pirates" WIPO can round up, far better able to do so.
These parallels came to me as I was reading through some of the causes of WW2 and reading through the linked PDF in Mike's post.
Even of the worst doesn't happen I do want to know what megaupload translates to in Korean. You can bet your bottom dollar that project will be one of the first they set up after WIPO's technical advisers (or pirates, if you would) go home.
Put mildly it's insane. Less mildly it's fcukin' insane.
So much for respect for UN sanctions on Korea, or any other rogue state, now that this UN agency reads them to mean that it applies to anyone but us.
And keep this in mind, IP extremist trolls, bob and others who want to complain about this site or piracy in general. WIPO didn't just take the genie out of the bottle. They broke the damned bottle.
WIPO doesn't think "intellectual property" is all that important. Why should anyone else?
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Re: Re: Super LOLZ
By extension that means that all the pirates are from Somalia, even the guy having lunch in the copier. Which must also mean that the IP extremist's top villain Google must also have a large presence in Somalia which is where they hide their nefarious activities on servers squirreled away there.
Now if only Megaupload had done the same thing the site would still be up and running and Dotcom wouldn't be fighting an extradition request.
See, it does all make sense if you only look at it like the bob's and AC's of the world want you and us to look at it.
It might take a night of beer and a truckload of pot brownies to get there but I assure you that it's worth it!
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Re: Re:
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Re: Malware thrives on P2P networks
And no, I don't use the verb "to share" to describe infecting someone with and STD though posts by someone called bob around here tempt me to do so just as soon as I acquire one.
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Re:
It has the potential to be a good ad about personal security at the office and the need for people to be careful about things like credit card numbers and what they take pictures of on copiers and scanners. The problem comes when the ad tries to cover too much ground in 60 seconds. Quite honestly it would have been far more effective as three 20 second ads focusing on each of the three messages they were trying to get out about security.
And then, for some of us anyway, maybe a lot of it, there's the MS tag line off the end which, by itself, can negate a lot of the positive message(s) in the ad.
On the post: Microsoft Releases Utterly Bizarre And Confusing Anti-Piracy Video
Re: Re:
And then there's a identity thief hiding inside every copier and scanner too if only you get the right models. (See above)
Not only that but piracy forces itself into every office, crackers lay in wait at the other end of the WAN and LAN waiting for a nice view of cleavage before downloading malware!
All without most people, it appears, being aware of the dangers out there or in there or somewhere there on the bosses completely unsecured LAN running a Windows server, no doubt. (Not like there's an ad agency in existence that will acknowledge the mere existence of other server OS's.)
I know without reading the article what the ad is trying to say. I'm equally sure that no one over the age of 6 will take it seriously and precious few under that age will.
It's certainly not going convince anyone with it's year old beef stew approach to any of the topics it tries to cover.
Love the production values, though!
Next >>