See, you don't realize the problem: Snowden didn't just discuss monitoring Americans, rather he released all about the legal (but unsavory) world of communication spying around the world, and the people involved. That helps the enemy (and hurts the US) by outing sources, making methods well known, and generally giving the enemies of the US an advantage they did not have before.
They knew the US might be listening - now they know exactly how and to what extent.
the "another paper on CETA" is written by a pro-labor group. Anything that rocks their boat is NEGATIVE AS HELL. I only read a few pages, but I could already tell they were looking for their desired results, rather than worrying about getting all the facts on both sides.
The Tuft study was co-authored by Pierre Kohler, well known for his anti-free trade stance. Again, not hard to imagine that he started out looking for this conclusion.
Yes, but does exposing the way the US operates around the world truly benefit the citizens, or did it set back security and thus put the citizens in peril?
Does it really uphold the constitution to aid the enemies of the country?
I am sort of amazed by what appears to be pretty black and white thinking on an issue that has evolved and changed over time.
The WP did what it thought was it's journalistic right and it's best choice when it published the Snowden leaks. However, over time it has become clear that Snowden didn't just want to expose PRISM or whatever, but rather that he has a much deeper motivation which appears to be long term harm to the US and it's relationships around the world.
Snowden didn't leak documents to prove the existence of PRISM. He data dumped. In that data is good and bad, right and wrong, and all of that dirty laundry is out there. Just like Private Manning, there may have been some sort of initial goal, but such huge data dumps have a life of their own. They have negative consequences far beyond the issues that the leaker was supposedly trying to expose.
Snowden isn't a hero. He's someone who took an oath to the country and then ignored that oath to try to take down the government. He continues to this day, feeding his friends in Moscow with more information and more angles to work. That's not an American hero...
The WP has finally realized they got played. It's nothing more than that.
Sorry to say, but your argument is without meaning, because you are looking at the wrong place.
Is copying money a crime? it's just copying. Oh wait, it is.
See, it's easy to look at the mechanism and say "the machine itself isn't breaking the law". You can use the machine to turn out copies of your primary school doodles. That would be fine. Start trying to bang out copies of money and you are in trouble - so much so that most good photocopiers won't even do it.
The copying isn't the issue - it's what is GAINED by copying - the value of a license without recompense to the artist (or those who hold the rights). it is the "something for nothing" thing that is key.
No, the VCR didn't kill hollywood - but then again, copies of copies of videotapes were useless, and every copy was made pretty much real time. It's another vapid and all too common argument.
Of course, it's a ruling in a country with the caste system, which the courts there seem to feel are natural and a divine right. When you understand how totally screwed up their view of human rights are, you come to understand that their court rulings are meaningless in any civilized way.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I knew you would get the story wrong.
More important, I think, is that it's not a question of needing more rules or more enforcement. That stick is perhaps a little worn out, and needed in more important places.
I think the answer is people, and their own self control. There is an insane undercurrent of "all for me and f-ck everyone else" that permeates much the American mindset. Someone flipping over a newspaper box and using it to sit in front of the free internet terminal for hours has issues, plain and simple. It's not just an internet thing, but rather a whole right and wrong, living in society thing.
There is no real good answer for that stuff. The only real answer is to remove whatever it is that is leading to the behavior. Making the internet terminals less friendly and less useful in certain ways sucks, but it's a perfect example of "why we can't have nice things".
First, my 9/11 story, which is quite simple: I arrived in Las Vegas about 1am or so (4am east coast) on 9/11, on a flight from New York. I got woken up by my business partner who said I probably would want to see this, and got up just in time to see the second plane hit. I got trapped in Vegas, which turned into a major ghost town. Nobody had money, nobody had a way to leave...
My opinion of the fall out of 9/11 is pretty simple: American lost it's innocence, and now faces a long battle to come to the realization that freedom as defined in the US is both amazing and a loaded weapon. The undoing of the US will likely be as a result of someone exploiting your "freedom" to hide their activities. The surveillance and spying and what not is a weight on the other side from freedom, and hopefully some balance will come that Americans can tolerate - but that is safer.
It's not that the homeless shouldn't use WiFi - it's just that wifi delivered in this manner is causing unforeseen results that are not good for the overall society.
Moreover, read my comments: It's not just about homeless. Others are congregating to enjoy free unlimited Wifi - to the point of dragging out seats and such and turning the sidewalk into a living room - again to the determent of the neighborhood as a whole.
But hey, thanks for playing "I'm a crappy troll", your score isn't high enough to win a prize.
Karl, I knew you would punt the story into the weeds. Too busy trying to get a headline and too little time spent trying to understand the problem.
To start with, the WiFi kioskes have a built in tablet (explaining how the homeless have tablets). While the original intention was for a tourist or whatever to be able to check a map or quickly pick up their hotmail, it instead turned into a place where people would stay for hours, playing games, watching videos, movies, and yes... porn. A side problem of course is that some people like to enjoy porn as an immersive experience, so they were pleasuring themselves in full public view.
The more significant issue is that with powerful and relatively quick wifi, people would gather around the immediate area to surf the web. Sort of the original intention, until they are dragging out benches, old sofas, chairs, and the like to sit in the middle of the sidewalk for hours enjoying the internet. Add in people illegally parking their cars (to get close enough for wifi) and the like, and you have significant neighborhood disruption.
Oh yeah, don't forget that you can add in loud voices, yelling, drug and alcohol consumption, fighting, and all the other stuff that comes when you get a lot of people in one place being themselves with no consideration for anyone else.
In some areas, homeless were moving in and setting up camp around the wifi spots so they could use them continuously... and use the charging features and such as well. Let's just say a really good idea instead was most appealing to the wrong people and they way the wifi kioskes were used was not to the benefit of the neighborhoods in question.
Based on his already expressed opinions, you can already pre-write the report for him. That's not an investigation, that's just a witch hunt. Probably a good one, considering there are plenty of (what he considers to be) witches out there.
I can't imagine how much you guys would be losing your shit if a supporter of these devices was "investigating".
No, "could" as in "I didn't click on the link because I don't want to deal with viruses, which is always a possibility on a shady pirate site". I went further than most of you (perhaps all of you) by actually going to look at the site in question to see how their pages are laid out and such. I could see the box cover images and the links.
Your view seems to be that if every page started with a Ubuntu distribution, that there could NEVER EVER EVER EVER be anything else on the page that would be bad. They could put up the pictures that are rumors to exist of what your Father did with you when you were young, and that would be okay, because Ubuntu?
"So? The image would be on the target page, not the page with a link. Unless the link is embedded in an image, but that's usally not the case and in any case the copyright claim should then be against the use of the image, not the content being linked to."
Actually, if you had bothered to look (like, research a bit) you would discover that in fact, the site in question uses boxcover images to link to their torrents, and has a 2 x 5 or so list twice on the left hand side of every page.
Reality. Damn, it sucks when you go on and on and it turns out you didn't even bother to check!
On the post: Will The Washington Post Give Back Its Pulitzer And Stand Trial With Snowden?
Re: Re: Re: Re: wow
They knew the US might be listening - now they know exactly how and to what extent.
On the post: New Economic Study Indicates EU-Canada Trade Deal Will Cause 'Unemployment, Inequality And Welfare Losses'
the "another paper on CETA" is written by a pro-labor group. Anything that rocks their boat is NEGATIVE AS HELL. I only read a few pages, but I could already tell they were looking for their desired results, rather than worrying about getting all the facts on both sides.
The Tuft study was co-authored by Pierre Kohler, well known for his anti-free trade stance. Again, not hard to imagine that he started out looking for this conclusion.
On the post: Will The Washington Post Give Back Its Pulitzer And Stand Trial With Snowden?
Re: Re: wow
Does it really uphold the constitution to aid the enemies of the country?
I think not.
On the post: Will The Washington Post Give Back Its Pulitzer And Stand Trial With Snowden?
wow
The WP did what it thought was it's journalistic right and it's best choice when it published the Snowden leaks. However, over time it has become clear that Snowden didn't just want to expose PRISM or whatever, but rather that he has a much deeper motivation which appears to be long term harm to the US and it's relationships around the world.
Snowden didn't leak documents to prove the existence of PRISM. He data dumped. In that data is good and bad, right and wrong, and all of that dirty laundry is out there. Just like Private Manning, there may have been some sort of initial goal, but such huge data dumps have a life of their own. They have negative consequences far beyond the issues that the leaker was supposedly trying to expose.
Snowden isn't a hero. He's someone who took an oath to the country and then ignored that oath to try to take down the government. He continues to this day, feeding his friends in Moscow with more information and more angles to work. That's not an American hero...
The WP has finally realized they got played. It's nothing more than that.
On the post: How Pirates Shaped The Internet As We Know It
Re: Re: Re: Piracy
Actually, being in possession of it is enough. Read the law.
On the post: How Pirates Shaped The Internet As We Know It
Re: Re:
On the post: How Pirates Shaped The Internet As We Know It
Re: Piracy
Is copying money a crime? it's just copying. Oh wait, it is.
See, it's easy to look at the mechanism and say "the machine itself isn't breaking the law". You can use the machine to turn out copies of your primary school doodles. That would be fine. Start trying to bang out copies of money and you are in trouble - so much so that most good photocopiers won't even do it.
The copying isn't the issue - it's what is GAINED by copying - the value of a license without recompense to the artist (or those who hold the rights). it is the "something for nothing" thing that is key.
No, the VCR didn't kill hollywood - but then again, copies of copies of videotapes were useless, and every copy was made pretty much real time. It's another vapid and all too common argument.
On the post: How Pirates Shaped The Internet As We Know It
" I want 60 million or more for advertising on my not pirate indexing only doesn't have any content but millions of people visit site".
See how easy that is?
On the post: Indian Court Says 'Copyright Is Not An Inevitable, Divine, Or Natural Right' And Photocopying Textbooks Is Fair Use
On the post: NYC Kills Internet Browsing At Free WiFi Kiosks After The City's Homeless Actually Use It
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: I knew you would get the story wrong.
I think the answer is people, and their own self control. There is an insane undercurrent of "all for me and f-ck everyone else" that permeates much the American mindset. Someone flipping over a newspaper box and using it to sit in front of the free internet terminal for hours has issues, plain and simple. It's not just an internet thing, but rather a whole right and wrong, living in society thing.
There is no real good answer for that stuff. The only real answer is to remove whatever it is that is leading to the behavior. Making the internet terminals less friendly and less useful in certain ways sucks, but it's a perfect example of "why we can't have nice things".
On the post: This Week In Techdirt History: September 11th
My opinion of the fall out of 9/11 is pretty simple: American lost it's innocence, and now faces a long battle to come to the realization that freedom as defined in the US is both amazing and a loaded weapon. The undoing of the US will likely be as a result of someone exploiting your "freedom" to hide their activities. The surveillance and spying and what not is a weight on the other side from freedom, and hopefully some balance will come that Americans can tolerate - but that is safer.
On the post: NYC Kills Internet Browsing At Free WiFi Kiosks After The City's Homeless Actually Use It
Re: Re: I knew you would get the story wrong.
It's not that the homeless shouldn't use WiFi - it's just that wifi delivered in this manner is causing unforeseen results that are not good for the overall society.
Moreover, read my comments: It's not just about homeless. Others are congregating to enjoy free unlimited Wifi - to the point of dragging out seats and such and turning the sidewalk into a living room - again to the determent of the neighborhood as a whole.
But hey, thanks for playing "I'm a crappy troll", your score isn't high enough to win a prize.
On the post: Unpatent Launches Combination Crowdfunding/Crowdsourcing Platform To Invalidate Stupid Patents
On the post: NYC Kills Internet Browsing At Free WiFi Kiosks After The City's Homeless Actually Use It
I knew you would get the story wrong.
To start with, the WiFi kioskes have a built in tablet (explaining how the homeless have tablets). While the original intention was for a tourist or whatever to be able to check a map or quickly pick up their hotmail, it instead turned into a place where people would stay for hours, playing games, watching videos, movies, and yes... porn. A side problem of course is that some people like to enjoy porn as an immersive experience, so they were pleasuring themselves in full public view.
The more significant issue is that with powerful and relatively quick wifi, people would gather around the immediate area to surf the web. Sort of the original intention, until they are dragging out benches, old sofas, chairs, and the like to sit in the middle of the sidewalk for hours enjoying the internet. Add in people illegally parking their cars (to get close enough for wifi) and the like, and you have significant neighborhood disruption.
Oh yeah, don't forget that you can add in loud voices, yelling, drug and alcohol consumption, fighting, and all the other stuff that comes when you get a lot of people in one place being themselves with no consideration for anyone else.
In some areas, homeless were moving in and setting up camp around the wifi spots so they could use them continuously... and use the charging features and such as well. Let's just say a really good idea instead was most appealing to the wrong people and they way the wifi kioskes were used was not to the benefit of the neighborhoods in question.
On the post: NYC Kills Internet Browsing At Free WiFi Kiosks After The City's Homeless Actually Use It
I knew you would get the story wrong.
On the post: Another Day, Another Anomaly: Paramount Issues DMCA Takedown On Ubuntu Linux Torrent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Shoo fly, shoo!
On the post: Another Day, Another Anomaly: Paramount Issues DMCA Takedown On Ubuntu Linux Torrent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Congressman In Charge Of OPM Hacking Report Announces Plan To Investigate Stingray Use Next
I can't imagine how much you guys would be losing your shit if a supporter of these devices was "investigating".
On the post: Another Day, Another Anomaly: Paramount Issues DMCA Takedown On Ubuntu Linux Torrent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Your view seems to be that if every page started with a Ubuntu distribution, that there could NEVER EVER EVER EVER be anything else on the page that would be bad. They could put up the pictures that are rumors to exist of what your Father did with you when you were young, and that would be okay, because Ubuntu?
You are a piece of work.
On the post: Another Day, Another Anomaly: Paramount Issues DMCA Takedown On Ubuntu Linux Torrent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Actually, if you had bothered to look (like, research a bit) you would discover that in fact, the site in question uses boxcover images to link to their torrents, and has a 2 x 5 or so list twice on the left hand side of every page.
Reality. Damn, it sucks when you go on and on and it turns out you didn't even bother to check!
Next >>