I understand where you're coming from, but as a parent, I feel that I messed up once or twice when I recommended a book which, in retrospect, my child wasn't emotionally developed enough to appreciate (or possibly, even, just absorb it without negative psychological effects).
I get the "we overprotect our children" bit, but your post throws up a false dichotomy. Do you actually believe that all children of all ages are capable of absorbing any or all experiences without negative effects?
Your comment was quite insightful, until this. You obviously don't understand how open-source works. Quite a large part of the widely-used projects are developed by paid employees of interested companies, and the majority of the remainder is developed by people who are quite aware that they are not working for monetary compensation (and I would guess that most don't even expect egoboo).
A very, very small minority GPL their stuff thinking that they'll rake something in via parallel licensing deals. A minuscule number of those, actually do (disclaimer: I know one such FOSS developer).
Art museums have been claiming copyright on the public domain since time immemoriam, or at least since the first art museum gift shop was opened. Just look at the back of any postcard in such a shop...
Ah, you don't understand. Actually, the only reason they went for a "takedown" was because this was a leak site, not a parody. Yes, Google has actual plans for all of these products, don't you worry!
Uhm, I totally agree with the fair use thing, but Mike should be the absolutely last person to be pulling out a weak argument that virally popular things actually disappear from the Internet once they've been "taken down".
OK, put your job where your mouth is. I dare you to upload original (or at least modified so that the content itself won't be automatically identified) porn to imgur.com (or any other image/file hosting site on the net) and then test your proxy's ability to block it. (You don't have to turn yourself in, in case you were wrong. Just be careful not to pee your pants from the anxiety.)
Or, possibly you could admit that your idealized world isn't, well, exactly reality?
You do seem to either have a problem with personal ethics, or the ability to expect ethical behavior in others. "Telecommuter" was stealing taxpayers' money, and not in the "government is inefficient" sense, in a very direct sense which said "Telecomuter" should have been aware of.
Frankly, in this story, something smells, and if I were investigating, the first possibility I'd investigate was that said "Telecommuter" was blackmailing said manager.
> and if we find just one image, do not pass "go", fired.
Talk about chilling effects. If I worked at your place, for sure I would only browse using a smartphone with uncensored net access. Even for browsing for work reasons. A pretty big thumbs down for working at your institute.
OTOH, your enthusiastic enforcement means that my fitting a small, inconspicuous device to anyone's keyboard cable could enable me to get him fired at will. I wouldn't find that an advantage, but I'm sure lots of assholes would.
OTOH, anyone could fit one of those on my computer. OK, for sure now I'm not getting near your workplace. Or it that what you really meant by
> There's no excuse for them not to have a proxy
as in, "them", the individual workers, running their own filtering software, trying to keep their jobs?
> if the e-mail says not to forward it, could be > copyright infringement, making one liable > for a $150,000 fine
I'm all for copyright reform, but I think Khanna should know better than to say this without qualification, making this statement, more or less, FUD. The $150K fine is only for registered works, and face it, the risk that a friend of yours has applied to the Copyright Office for an official copyright registration on his email is, essentially, zero.
Are you blind? Did you somehow overlook Viacom vs. YouTube, in which Google presented evidence that Viacom authorized the posting of numerous "pirated(-looking) videos" on YouTube as a form of viral marketing?
> Congress was so intent on providing safe harbors
I wasn't there when the DMCA managed to get through, but given what I've been seeing about Congress recently, it seems to me to be equally likely that they were just "so intent" on pushing something through, so they could continue to collect big campaign contributions from certain lobbyists...
On the post: High School Principal Cancels Entire Reading Program To Stop Students From Reading Cory Doctorow's 'Little Brother'
False dichotomy
I get the "we overprotect our children" bit, but your post throws up a false dichotomy. Do you actually believe that all children of all ages are capable of absorbing any or all experiences without negative effects?
On the post: Yes, Another Massive Vulnerability Was Found In OpenSSL, But This Is Actually A Good Sign
Bad way to evaluate relative risk
http://cve.mitre.org/cgi-bin/cvename.cgi?name=CVE-2014-3466 ?
Switching libraries might be worthwhile, or possibly not, depending on how much audited code on the application side would need to be rewritten.
All software has bugs, OpenSSL will probably get sorted out eventually.
On the post: Yes, Another Massive Vulnerability Was Found In OpenSSL, But This Is Actually A Good Sign
Re: Half Assing it all
Your comment was quite insightful, until this. You obviously don't understand how open-source works. Quite a large part of the widely-used projects are developed by paid employees of interested companies, and the majority of the remainder is developed by people who are quite aware that they are not working for monetary compensation (and I would guess that most don't even expect egoboo).
A very, very small minority GPL their stuff thinking that they'll rake something in via parallel licensing deals. A minuscule number of those, actually do (disclaimer: I know one such FOSS developer).
On the post: TrueCrypt Page Says It's Not Secure, All Development Stopped
Re: LUKS
Suddenly the developer of FreeOTFE decided to abandon the project in June 2013. This takes on a different light in view of what happened to Lavabit...
On the post: Metropolitan Museum Of Art Claims Copyright Over Massive Trove Of Public Domain Works
So what's new?
On the post: State AG Tries To Order Removal Of Public Records From Journalist's Blog, Resulting In Records Being Posted Everywhere
Re: Re:
On the post: Google Trademark Bullies Obviously Non-Commercial Parody Site
Re:
On the post: To Succeed At EPA: Watch Tons Of Porn, (Don't) Work From Home, Or Pretend You're A Secret Agent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I posit, then, that either your net access is more or less useless, or you could have actually taken my challenge.
On the post: Goldieblox Agreed To Pay Charity $1 Million For Using Beastie Boys' Girls
Sorry, no
Uhm, I totally agree with the fair use thing, but Mike should be the absolutely last person to be pulling out a weak argument that virally popular things actually disappear from the Internet once they've been "taken down".
On the post: To Succeed At EPA: Watch Tons Of Porn, (Don't) Work From Home, Or Pretend You're A Secret Agent
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
OK, put your job where your mouth is. I dare you to upload original (or at least modified so that the content itself won't be automatically identified) porn to imgur.com (or any other image/file hosting site on the net) and then test your proxy's ability to block it. (You don't have to turn yourself in, in case you were wrong. Just be careful not to pee your pants from the anxiety.)
Or, possibly you could admit that your idealized world isn't, well, exactly reality?
On the post: Federal Election Commission Says Political Action Committees Can Accept Payment Via Bitcoins
Nice troll
> unless someone alters the entire thing to increase the limit
On the post: To Succeed At EPA: Watch Tons Of Porn, (Don't) Work From Home, Or Pretend You're A Secret Agent
Re:I've got no problem with "Telecommuter"
You do seem to either have a problem with personal ethics, or the ability to expect ethical behavior in others. "Telecommuter" was stealing taxpayers' money, and not in the "government is inefficient" sense, in a very direct sense which said "Telecomuter" should have been aware of.
Frankly, in this story, something smells, and if I were investigating, the first possibility I'd investigate was that said "Telecommuter" was blackmailing said manager.
On the post: To Succeed At EPA: Watch Tons Of Porn, (Don't) Work From Home, Or Pretend You're A Secret Agent
Re: Re:
Talk about chilling effects. If I worked at your place, for sure I would only browse using a smartphone with uncensored net access. Even for browsing for work reasons. A pretty big thumbs down for working at your institute.
OTOH, your enthusiastic enforcement means that my fitting a small, inconspicuous device to anyone's keyboard cable could enable me to get him fired at will. I wouldn't find that an advantage, but I'm sure lots of assholes would.
OTOH, anyone could fit one of those on my computer. OK, for sure now I'm not getting near your workplace. Or it that what you really meant by
> There's no excuse for them not to have a proxy
as in, "them", the individual workers, running their own filtering software, trying to keep their jobs?
On the post: New Paper Says It's Time To Reasonably Decrease Copyright Term And Rethink Putting Copyright In Treaties
Re: Re: A quibble
OK, but he didn't point that out; he glossed over the registration requirement.
On the post: New Paper Says It's Time To Reasonably Decrease Copyright Term And Rethink Putting Copyright In Treaties
A quibble
> copyright infringement, making one liable
> for a $150,000 fine
I'm all for copyright reform, but I think Khanna should know better than to say this without qualification, making this statement, more or less, FUD. The $150K fine is only for registered works, and face it, the risk that a friend of yours has applied to the Copyright Office for an official copyright registration on his email is, essentially, zero.
On the post: Study Shows How Notice-And-Takedown Reduces Transaction Costs In Making Works Legally Available
Viacom vs. YouTube
Are you blind? Did you somehow overlook Viacom vs. YouTube, in which Google presented evidence that Viacom authorized the posting of numerous "pirated(-looking) videos" on YouTube as a form of viral marketing?
Somehow, your "daft" is my reality. Sorry, dude.
On the post: Study Shows How Notice-And-Takedown Reduces Transaction Costs In Making Works Legally Available
Re:
On the post: US Has A 'Secret Exception' To Reasonable Suspicion For Putting People On The No Fly List
Remind me of a certain lyric
They put you on a list,
It's bureaucratic,
But hey, it's home!
On the post: Study Shows How Notice-And-Takedown Reduces Transaction Costs In Making Works Legally Available
Forgot something
I think you meant "legal availability"...
On the post: Why We Filed An Amicus Brief In Garcia v. Google: Blaming 3rd Parties Has Serious Impact On Free Speech
"so intent"?
I wasn't there when the DMCA managed to get through, but given what I've been seeing about Congress recently, it seems to me to be equally likely that they were just "so intent" on pushing something through, so they could continue to collect big campaign contributions from certain lobbyists...
Next >>