The real idiocy here is that as soon as you censor the ideas of a particular group, people – who already distrust “all things government” - begin to wonder what it is that “they” [government] doesn't want the people to know, so they go looking for answers. Instead of decreasing exposure, they risk increasing it - from curiosity. The only workable response to “terrorist propaganda” is well reasoned (as in, “average people” will understand it) counter propaganda. Do objective, critical analysis of their propaganda and – dispassionately! - point out the errors and consequences of their instructions and suggestions, basing those on obvious FACTS, not on “touchy-feely” appeals that look more like emotional attacks than anything else. That said, quite frankly, the US (and the other “Five Eyes”) have very little in the way of moral high-ground from which to criticize what extremist groups do. What, exactly, do the extremists do that our governments don't? Execute people? look into “extra-judicial killings”. Torture? remember the CIA torture report? Kidnapping? investigate the governments detention policies. Expropriation? how about “asset forfeiture” (as now practised by LEO in the US)? Maybe the best answer is to prove – by example – that the way of life in the “free countries” really is better by setting an example of BEING better. Stop doing all this stupid-ass crap and go back to what the Fore-Fathers envisioned our countries to be. Extremist groups use violence as an answer to their perceived grievances; I can understand that because it's the same behaviour you see in children, too immature to make reasoned choices. The western countries are supposed to be more mature – so why aren't they behaving more maturely? When you lower yourself to the level of a bully you simply become another bully yourself. Stop making people feel “disenfranchised” and you'll have less radicalization. /rant
With banks (and other financial institutions), they are one of the endpoints of the encryption, and, therefore, have a key. They don't have to make a "back door". (Why, however, do I feel "less protected" knowing that there is another copy of that key "out there somewhere"?) With phone encryption, the manufacturer is not and endpoint of the communication, so they - properly! - do not have a key. The way it's supposed to work: if LEO show up with a warrent, banks either produce the information or loose their charter; with people, they produce the information or go to jail (for contempt and obstruction). I fail to see the actual problem here. And, using the "banks do it" example, the same avenue already exists for "private communications"!
This won't only be a tool to "silence free speech" and "punish innovation" - it will be a tool to rewrite history. What stops articles about Tiananmen Square or the Holocaust from being removed in the name of the "Right To Be Forgotten"? When we manage to do that (forget history), it's certain that we will repeat it.
Wouldn't getting the manufacturer to unlock a device to prevent 5th ammendment problems be sorta like when a home owner won't grant permission for a warrentless search, they go get a locksmith to open the house door and invite them in?
The current (and growig) levels of hostility toward LEOs isn't from the video/photos people are taking - people are taking the video/photos because of the hostility. The hostility is a predictable response to decades of abuse by LEOs.
Often, after reading a post, there are items in it that I'm unclear about, don't understand or don't agree with. My first step is to read the comments. Most of the time, whatever I was having an issue with is already there; I don't tend to bring it up again. Sometimes I just have a quip of my own to toss in - and sometimes I get things wrong, only to then to be corrected by other commenters - something I appreciate very much; they clarify my confusion in an incidental way. I even look forward to comments from the not-so-friendly troll with a hate-on for Mike - I want to see if he's managed a new level of idiocy (spoiler: usually... yes, todays was a head-scratcher of a let down). Sometimes - no offence to the writers here at TechDirt - the comments are the best part of the post!
I can't say how often I've found the comments to an article to be more entertaining and informitive than the article itself was! Yes, trolls are annoying. They distract and redirect the comment stream into irrelevancy. But .. we don't have to feed trolls.
Re: Re: Re: It's depressing that kids in the UK are smart enough to access porn
It's not so much that the voters are morons - it's more that there's no one worth voting for, and not even anyone different enough to be worth voting against
Maybe it's time to find a more realistic solution?
For those that claim to be Christian, I'd like to point out that God didn't create clothes. (See Genesis 3:7-11). But, God DID create sexuality - and did not give "Adam and Eve" **any** "rules" about it. Somewhere around the beginning of their teen years, children go though puberty. In the ensuing flood of hormones, sexuality becomes an overwhelming priority; trying to prevent this is like "spitting into the wind" - it isn't going to work. You might as well legislate against tides. Legislation didn't work for Prohibition, and drinking isn't biologically driven. The young people will find a way to satisfy their totally natural (chemically induced) curiosity. "Pornography" would seem to be a preferable alternative to them finding out directly from each other. At the very least, it's less dangerous to them. It's still a bad alternative, but the choice would seem to be between "bad" and "worse". And why? Because our modern society has decreed that that this normal, natural drive is "wrong" (until you're 18 years old - then it's ok). (View a consensual picture of a nude adult at the age of 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes? that's a crime! One minute later, it's not! How does THIS make sense?) I believe that we'd be better served as a society trying to find a better way to allow young people to satisfy their (from a biological perspective) normal, natural curiosity safely, especially since they are going to find a way to do it anyway, no matter what the law says.
The talk of withdrawing from France (as has already happened in Spain) is playing right into the hands of what the EU politicians want. They can't honestly compete and they can't just tell Google to go away without major public backlash; they CAN, however, spin-doctor it to look like a public service and get Google to withdraw. That way, the tech industry in the EU - that has never honestly tried to compete - gets a free hand up and the politicians (think they) look like heros.
"An ebook is easier to copy and digital copies are identical clones of the original work meaning that second-hand goods are largely indistinguishable from the original; they can be reproduced indefinitely without any loss of quality."
So why, then, do they cost so much? Frequently, I can get a physical book - and have it shipped to me - for less than an ebook. Price them reasonably (and actually make them, you know, like .... available) and piracy goes away.
Peter Beckett? Never heard of him. The band "Player"? never heard of them. The song "Baby, Come Back"? vaguely rings a bell ... but since that's all it does, it was obviously not a favorite. Keith Urban? I've heard of hime(although I don't think I've heard any of his work) - he's the lead act in a western music festival near here in a couple weeks. Nicole Kidman? Heard of her - an actress, I think. Can't name a single production she was in though. Marriage between Urban and Kidman? Didn't know - don't care. American Idol judge? Didn't know - don't care - have never watched it. The term "Player"? In relation to music, all that comes to mind is the Player Piano!
Mr. Snowden was in a bad position; he had to choose between his moral code (which, incidentally, supports the Constitution) or “other laws” (which are theoretically based on the Constitution). Further, as I understand it, failing to revealing criminal activity is also a crime. There is no way he could “win” here; as soon as he had knowledge of criminal activity, he was automatically guilty of something. If he returned to the States to face trial, it would be a Star Chamber affair in which he would not even be allowed to make a defence. Stay free and proud, Mr. Snowden – the world needs moral people like you!
Naaa .. they got paid. In fact, they have a vest interest in NOT winning quickly - they get paid over and over for the same task. (Wish I could do that with MY employer!)
On the post: Google Ideas Boss's Really Bad Idea: Kick ISIS Off The Open Web
The only workable response to “terrorist propaganda” is well reasoned (as in, “average people” will understand it) counter propaganda. Do objective, critical analysis of their propaganda and – dispassionately! - point out the errors and consequences of their instructions and suggestions, basing those on obvious FACTS, not on “touchy-feely” appeals that look more like emotional attacks than anything else.
That said, quite frankly, the US (and the other “Five Eyes”) have very little in the way of moral high-ground from which to criticize what extremist groups do. What, exactly, do the extremists do that our governments don't? Execute people? look into “extra-judicial killings”. Torture? remember the CIA torture report? Kidnapping? investigate the governments detention policies. Expropriation? how about “asset forfeiture” (as now practised by LEO in the US)?
Maybe the best answer is to prove – by example – that the way of life in the “free countries” really is better by setting an example of BEING better. Stop doing all this stupid-ass crap and go back to what the Fore-Fathers envisioned our countries to be.
Extremist groups use violence as an answer to their perceived grievances; I can understand that because it's the same behaviour you see in children, too immature to make reasoned choices. The western countries are supposed to be more mature – so why aren't they behaving more maturely? When you lower yourself to the level of a bully you simply become another bully yourself.
Stop making people feel “disenfranchised” and you'll have less radicalization.
/rant
On the post: Senator Richard Burr: Confused And Wrong On Encryption
Not really comparable
With phone encryption, the manufacturer is not and endpoint of the communication, so they - properly! - do not have a key.
The way it's supposed to work: if LEO show up with a warrent, banks either produce the information or loose their charter; with people, they produce the information or go to jail (for contempt and obstruction).
I fail to see the actual problem here. And, using the "banks do it" example, the same avenue already exists for "private communications"!
On the post: NY Times Warns About Europe Expanding The 'Right To Be Forgotten'
It's worse than it looks
What stops articles about Tiananmen Square or the Holocaust from being removed in the name of the "Right To Be Forgotten"?
When we manage to do that (forget history), it's certain that we will repeat it.
On the post: DOJ Claims Apple Should Be Forced To Decrypt iPhones Because Apple, Not Customers, 'Own' iOS
On the post: Comey Sells The 'Ferguson Effect,' Blames Spikes In Violent Crime On Citizens With Cameras
They have it backwards
The hostility is a predictable response to decades of abuse by LEOs.
On the post: Tim Berners-Lee: 'Just Say No' To Facebook's Plan To Bastardize The Internet
Apple Analogy
On the post: Motherboard's Version Of 'Valuing Discussion' Involves No Longer Letting You Comment
Why I read comments
Most of the time, whatever I was having an issue with is already there; I don't tend to bring it up again. Sometimes I just have a quip of my own to toss in - and sometimes I get things wrong, only to then to be corrected by other commenters - something I appreciate very much; they clarify my confusion in an incidental way.
I even look forward to comments from the not-so-friendly troll with a hate-on for Mike - I want to see if he's managed a new level of idiocy (spoiler: usually... yes, todays was a head-scratcher of a let down).
Sometimes - no offence to the writers here at TechDirt - the comments are the best part of the post!
On the post: EU Orders Makers Of DieselStormers To Change Name Because Diesel Clothing Trademarked Diesel For Everything
Re:
On the post: Toronto Sun: We Value Criticism And The Voice Of The Reader So Much, We're Killing Both
The best part of some articles
Yes, trolls are annoying. They distract and redirect the comment stream into irrelevancy. But .. we don't have to feed trolls.
On the post: Quebec Decides It Needs ANOTHER Hate Speech Law, Only One That's Worse Than The Law It Already Has
Face Coverings
Does this mean their SWAT teams can't wear masks while "giving public service"? ("Law Enforcement" is (supposed to be) a "Public Service" afterall.)
On the post: David Cameron Wants To Shut Down Porn Sites Because Kids Are Clever Enough To Defeat Age Restrictions
Re: Re: Re: It's depressing that kids in the UK are smart enough to access porn
On the post: David Cameron Wants To Shut Down Porn Sites Because Kids Are Clever Enough To Defeat Age Restrictions
Re: Re: Maybe it's time to find a more realistic solution?
On the post: David Cameron Wants To Shut Down Porn Sites Because Kids Are Clever Enough To Defeat Age Restrictions
Maybe it's time to find a more realistic solution?
Somewhere around the beginning of their teen years, children go though puberty. In the ensuing flood of hormones, sexuality becomes an overwhelming priority; trying to prevent this is like "spitting into the wind" - it isn't going to work. You might as well legislate against tides. Legislation didn't work for Prohibition, and drinking isn't biologically driven.
The young people will find a way to satisfy their totally natural (chemically induced) curiosity. "Pornography" would seem to be a preferable alternative to them finding out directly from each other. At the very least, it's less dangerous to them.
It's still a bad alternative, but the choice would seem to be between "bad" and "worse". And why? Because our modern society has decreed that that this normal, natural drive is "wrong" (until you're 18 years old - then it's ok). (View a consensual picture of a nude adult at the age of 17 years, 364 days, 23 hours and 59 minutes? that's a crime! One minute later, it's not! How does THIS make sense?)
I believe that we'd be better served as a society trying to find a better way to allow young people to satisfy their (from a biological perspective) normal, natural curiosity safely, especially since they are going to find a way to do it anyway, no matter what the law says.
On the post: Google To French Regulators Looking To Expand 'Right To Be Forgotten' Globally: Forget About It
This is what the EU wants
On the post: UK Publishers Don't See Why Anyone's Complaining About Copyright Law
Between the lines
So why, then, do they cost so much? Frequently, I can get a physical book - and have it shipped to me - for less than an ebook. Price them reasonably (and actually make them, you know, like .... available) and piracy goes away.
On the post: 70's Band 'Player' Sues Keith Urban For His 'Player Guitar Kit' For Trademark Violation
Let me respond like this ....
Keith Urban? I've heard of hime(although I don't think I've heard any of his work) - he's the lead act in a western music festival near here in a couple weeks.
Nicole Kidman? Heard of her - an actress, I think. Can't name a single production she was in though.
Marriage between Urban and Kidman? Didn't know - don't care.
American Idol judge? Didn't know - don't care - have never watched it.
The term "Player"? In relation to music, all that comes to mind is the Player Piano!
On the post: Elected Officials Grudgingly Admit Snowden Forced This Debate On Surveillance... As White House Insists He Belongs In Jail
Re: Morals?
If he returned to the States to face trial, it would be a Star Chamber affair in which he would not even be allowed to make a defence.
Stay free and proud, Mr. Snowden – the world needs moral people like you!
On the post: Encryption: What The FBI Wants It Can Only Have By Destroying Computing And Censoring The Internet
Re: Re: Still misses the point..but just barely this time.
On the post: 3D Printed Copyright Creep
"copyright has its purpose, but that it should not be abused"
On the post: Trademark Examiner Not Swayed By Katy Perry's Attempt To Trademark The Left Shark
Re: How Sad
Next >>