I liked this one. They say that you shouldn't take advice from successful people. You should study them and copy what they do. They often don't know (or admit to themselves) why they were really successful.
Patents are supposed "to promote the Progress of Science and useful Arts" for "We the People of the United States." Go reread the preamble of the Constitution.
Was this designed so no politician could ever vote for it and be re-elected?
*scratches head*
This is either entirely incompetent or a semi-brilliant Machiavelli plot to hold onto power.
It is entirely possible that the administration gave into every asshole demand from the lobbyists so everyone would recognize it as a corrupt abortion that could never be passed. That would keep the lobbying dollars flowing and keep the public from being harmed.
It is also possible that the disregard for environmental concerns could be a plot to degrade the environments of any competitor nations insane enough to fall for the trap and thereby make them less competitive in the future.
However, all this could also be explained by massive boneheaded incompetence the likes of which is rarely seen in a living creature. It all seems like a little too much though. Someone had to know this could never pass.
Obviously, some steps need to be taken. If this bill only targeted foreign entities, I may support it.
If this bill was only used for counterintelligence, I could begrudgingly understand it.
However, this just seems like another bill that's worded just broadly enough to have no real limits.
Maybe we should appeal to the politicians self interest. Hey Republicans, when the Dems are in power, they will likely use this to spy on you and defeat you in elections. Hey Democrats, the Republicans are going to do the exact same thing to you when they are in power. By not putting in adequate privacy safeguards, you are likely giving ammunition for your opponents to use against you.
Apple is kind of a lost cause in this regard. They're already on top, so any market changing innovations are likely to only bring them down relatively.
In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if we were all hating on Apple like people hated Microsoft when they were in the same position.
Economies of scale only work if they can bring the unit cost of something down by producing more of it. You cannot produce more OTA bandwidth. It's limited by physics. Therefore, economies of scale should not bring the price down, unless there are already major problems in the marketplace.
A monopoly would only encourage the inefficient use of spectrum by denying market competition.
It's so refreshing to see a company come forward and say "I prefer socialism and/or and corporate welfare in America."
It's so simple though. If their were only one phone company, they could lay all those other people off. Less employment means fewer labor costs.
Also, without all that pesky competition, they could jack up prices. That's very efficient for AT&T. Their return on investment could shoot through the roof and customers would only have to pay 2x to 3x in additional costs.
Wow, the FBI's version of DRM. Not only will everyone know about it because everyone will have to install it, but it will only affect those stupid enough not to remove/block it.
There will be sites dedicated to removing it since everyone will have to know about it.
Not only that, but it also doesn't affect open source apps (are they really going to show us the source code too?), especially those with international production/collaboration because there will be no requirement to include it.
I guess stupid criminals would be the target of this, because it won't catch anyone else.
"How many girls do you think the cops can bust a day without breaking the system?"
How does busting girls help? You're making the desperate people more desperate by adding more costs to them. That's not a good incentive to stop.
Adding costs to their customers might help, but I'm a little indifferent to what consenting adults do. I don't condone it, I just accept that the world can be an ugly place and people do what they must to survive.
Surveilling these ads seems like a good way to gather intelligence on those trafficking in children. I think driving the market further underground just makes it harder to help the real victims.
Sue the labels for making libelous/slanderous accusations. (I assume that someone somewhere had to make a libelous/slanderous statement to get the prosecutors to go along with this.)
Sue the government for denying due process, illegal takings, and first amendment violations.
I'm not sure what would make this right for the owner of the website, but make them give it to you.
No one wants a "wide open" market for human trafficking. We want substantive action taken. We want to be able to measure where it's coming from and where it's going. We want to remove the incentives that drive the worst abuses.
Shifting the advertising and distribution networks around makes intelligence gathering harder and does nothing to address the core of the problem.
I use torrents to get all kinds of things... legally. I've downloaded linux distributions, open source software, legally distributed media content ect. Torrenting is an efficient means of distribution and probably won't be going anywhere until the next distributive technology comes along.
I don't think anyone said "give it to me now or you'll be sorry." If they did, they would certainly lose any respect here.
People seem to be saying "give it to me now, or I'll go get it elsewhere." At worst, the pirates come off as uncaring. At worst, the IP holders come off as malicious. In this equation, my ethics say the pirates are less wrong than (some of) the content holders.
What happens when you hit a dog to teach it? It learns to hate and/or fear people. It may not bite you, but it is much more likely to bite the neighbor kid.
There are ways to be responsible without damaging the children involved.
On the post: TV Network Execs Contemplate Going To Court To Say Skipping Commercials Is Illegal
Really TV execs?
On the post: TV Network Execs Contemplate Going To Court To Say Skipping Commercials Is Illegal
Really TV execs?
On the post: DailyDirt: Graduation Advice
I liked this one. They say that you shouldn't take advice from successful people. You should study them and copy what they do. They often don't know (or admit to themselves) why they were really successful.
On the post: Can Congress Work Like A Tech Startup?
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Why Patent Injunctions Are Even Worse For Open Source
Re:
On the post: DailyDirt: Flying Weapons
Uncanny
On the post: After SOPA And ACTA, Now TPP Starts To Fall Apart
Re: Re:
On the post: After SOPA And ACTA, Now TPP Starts To Fall Apart
Was this designed so no politician could ever vote for it and be re-elected?
*scratches head*
This is either entirely incompetent or a semi-brilliant Machiavelli plot to hold onto power.
It is entirely possible that the administration gave into every asshole demand from the lobbyists so everyone would recognize it as a corrupt abortion that could never be passed. That would keep the lobbying dollars flowing and keep the public from being harmed.
It is also possible that the disregard for environmental concerns could be a plot to degrade the environments of any competitor nations insane enough to fall for the trap and thereby make them less competitive in the future.
However, all this could also be explained by massive boneheaded incompetence the likes of which is rarely seen in a living creature. It all seems like a little too much though. Someone had to know this could never pass.
On the post: CISPA Sponsor Warns Bill Is Needed Because China's Chinese Hackers From China Are Stealing All-American Secrets (China!)
Self Interest
If this bill was only used for counterintelligence, I could begrudgingly understand it.
However, this just seems like another bill that's worded just broadly enough to have no real limits.
Maybe we should appeal to the politicians self interest. Hey Republicans, when the Dems are in power, they will likely use this to spy on you and defeat you in elections. Hey Democrats, the Republicans are going to do the exact same thing to you when they are in power. By not putting in adequate privacy safeguards, you are likely giving ammunition for your opponents to use against you.
On the post: Apple & Samsung's Patent Nuclear War: 50 Lawsuits In 10 Countries In 1 Year
In a few years, I wouldn't be surprised if we were all hating on Apple like people hated Microsoft when they were in the same position.
On the post: AT&T Argues That More Competition Is Bad For You & Leads To Higher Prices
Re:
Economies of scale only work if they can bring the unit cost of something down by producing more of it. You cannot produce more OTA bandwidth. It's limited by physics. Therefore, economies of scale should not bring the price down, unless there are already major problems in the marketplace.
A monopoly would only encourage the inefficient use of spectrum by denying market competition.
On the post: UK Gov't Considering Requiring A 'Porn License' If You Want To Look At Porn Online
On the post: Here We Go Again: FBI Wants Backdoors To Snoop On Nearly All Internet Communications
Re: Re: Inefficient
http://www.dwavesys.com/en/dw_homepage.html
On the post: AT&T Argues That More Competition Is Bad For You & Leads To Higher Prices
Corporate Welfare
It's so simple though. If their were only one phone company, they could lay all those other people off. Less employment means fewer labor costs.
Also, without all that pesky competition, they could jack up prices. That's very efficient for AT&T. Their return on investment could shoot through the roof and customers would only have to pay 2x to 3x in additional costs.
On the post: FBI Quietly Returns Anonymizing Server It Seized... Without Telling Anyone
FBI meets DRM
There will be sites dedicated to removing it since everyone will have to know about it.
Not only that, but it also doesn't affect open source apps (are they really going to show us the source code too?), especially those with international production/collaboration because there will be no requirement to include it.
I guess stupid criminals would be the target of this, because it won't catch anyone else.
On the post: Misguided Senators Propose Plan To Make It Harder For Law Enforcement To Track Down Human Trafficking Online
Re: Re: Re:
How does busting girls help? You're making the desperate people more desperate by adding more costs to them. That's not a good incentive to stop.
Adding costs to their customers might help, but I'm a little indifferent to what consenting adults do. I don't condone it, I just accept that the world can be an ugly place and people do what they must to survive.
Surveilling these ads seems like a good way to gather intelligence on those trafficking in children. I think driving the market further underground just makes it harder to help the real victims.
On the post: Judge Lets Feds Censor Blog For Over A Year So The RIAA Could Take Its Sweet Time
Sue
Sue the government for denying due process, illegal takings, and first amendment violations.
I'm not sure what would make this right for the owner of the website, but make them give it to you.
This is why we have courts.
On the post: Misguided Senators Propose Plan To Make It Harder For Law Enforcement To Track Down Human Trafficking Online
Re:
Shifting the advertising and distribution networks around makes intelligence gathering harder and does nothing to address the core of the problem.
On the post: Google's Fiber Makes MPAA Skittish. Why Does Hollywood See All Technology In Terms Of Piracy?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: @Anonymous Coward
I use torrents to get all kinds of things... legally. I've downloaded linux distributions, open source software, legally distributed media content ect. Torrenting is an efficient means of distribution and probably won't be going anywhere until the next distributive technology comes along.
I don't think anyone said "give it to me now or you'll be sorry." If they did, they would certainly lose any respect here.
People seem to be saying "give it to me now, or I'll go get it elsewhere." At worst, the pirates come off as uncaring. At worst, the IP holders come off as malicious. In this equation, my ethics say the pirates are less wrong than (some of) the content holders.
On the post: Does It Makes Sense To Charge Kids & Their Parents With Libel For Online Bullying?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Nevarr!
What happens when you hit a dog to teach it? It learns to hate and/or fear people. It may not bite you, but it is much more likely to bite the neighbor kid.
There are ways to be responsible without damaging the children involved.
Next >>