Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 15 Aug 2019 @ 8:05am
Seriously now
Legacy media attacking social media isn't going to fix their problems. If they think that somehow getting rid of Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. is going to transfer whatever sources of income they have (advertising, paywalls?) over to themselves is just ridiculous. I don't use social media, but then my use of legacy media is very limited, and mostly through RSS feeds (which don't have advertising). Now I know not everybody is me, nor should we expect large groups to be as circumspect.
The fact is that what is being called 'Big Tech' serves a very different purpose than legacy media, and while one may support the other, they are not in any way interchangeable. Nor are their income sources.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Aug 2019 @ 6:05pm
Re: Easy to use != free of work
They didn't say free, did they? But hey, don't let us spoil your outburst.
The number of outlets for various kinds of publication is astonishing, and today it probably isn't even necessary to code it from scratch. I don't know how Sci-Hub works, and it might take more than just one push of a button (I would guess one needs an account and verifiable credentials, or at least position) before someone did CNTRL C, CNTRL V and then push the button to publish.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Aug 2019 @ 5:56pm
Name brand clothing vs brewery paraphernalia, confusion apparent
I have never considered wearing my beer (and those of you who are snickering and commenting about the spare tire at my middle should cease and desist post haste, you've been warned).
At the same time, I never though about drinking my Hugo Boss shirts.
Confusing beer logo'd wearable's with dress clothing (do they make anything else? not that I've heard of) doesn't even seem possible. Hell, I reject clothing with logo's on them (I want to be paid, a lot, to advertise for someone) (though I did like the clothing that had those little crocodiles on them a long time ago, until they got so uppity in the price category).
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Aug 2019 @ 4:28pm
Re: (sorry not sorry)
"At this point, it may not be long before the only way they can remain in operation is if some larger corporation swallows them whole. Food for thought."
Significant golden parachutes might convince the brass at Elsevier, but it would be a really poor investment for the larger corporation. Unless they need a tax break.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Aug 2019 @ 8:00am
While I'm at it
"...all eyes are now on the ongoing lawsuit by 23 state AGs against the FCC for repealing net neutrality. A ruling in that case is expected any day now..."
Could we get some kind of update as to exactly where this stands? It seems like it has been 'any day now' for a few months.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 13 Aug 2019 @ 7:57am
It's like light is shining on the darkness of Pai
"The Commission did not adequately address the harms of deregulation or justify its portrayal of those harms as negligible. In light of its mischaracterization of small cells’ footprint, the scale of the deployment it anticipates, the many expedients already in place for low-impact wireless construction, and the Commission’s decades-long history of carefully tailored review, the FCC’s characterization of the Order as consistent with its longstanding policy was not “logical and rational.""
Seems like someone's gotten to the root of Pai's modus operandi.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Aug 2019 @ 10:37am
Re:
Wouldn't that expose private information? Of course knowing which ones were valid and/or associating any particular number to a particular individual would require some additional information, but, but, but...MY social security number was revealed and I might live in California.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 12 Aug 2019 @ 8:45am
Look, over there...now check out our awesome proposal
This sounds like the benefits given to video (movie/TV) production companies that promise jobs, which turn out to be part time and/or temporary. The end result benefit to the community is significantly less than any economic improvement promised by the outside entity. When will states/communities learn about bait and switch or the flashing bogus promises for what they are?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 10 Aug 2019 @ 6:37am
Re: Re: Re:
Wouldn't that destroy future generations of MAFFIAA members' ability to fodder their nest...erm...fleece the public...um...enforce copyright?
They not only don't create anything (well they do seem intent on creating havoc, and are pretty good at creating havoc, but it isn't apparent that havoc is copyrightable, but maybe there is a patent opportunity), they merely represent companies that don't create anything. That would seem to diminish the whole concept of life plus seventy five years (which could be confused with life plus cancer when considering future creativity).
Why wouldn't they think of the children (the golden parachutes might be all the explanation needed)?
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Aug 2019 @ 7:01pm
Simon says, but why does Simon say that?
Sound like the US (and others) war on poverty, drugs, terrorism, etc.. Ill defined parameters, overly consequential reactions, lack of judicial process in determining actual culpability, and just what the intellectual imaginary property 'owners' want.
Anonymous Anonymous Coward (profile), 8 Aug 2019 @ 6:30pm
Re:
That copyright infringement in the posting of laws only pertained to the annotations made by third parties, not the law itself (right or wrong).That the actual law is available, to the average smart phone (OK finding the relevant law might be beyond the ken of the average user) user makes the law available to everyone. Even cops.
This is in conflict with the Supreme Court decision where cops don't need to know the laws they enforce. Having the law knowingly available on their smart phones would put that concept in the dustbin. The fact that the law is available to individual law enforcement officers brings the question of whether they need to know vs can know to the forefront. What if they did know, but chose to ignore, or worse, did know but didn't care?
They are hired to enforce the law. Not knowing the law they are hired to enforce seems like what they were hired for was not enforcing the law. So what were they hired for?
On the post: NYPD's Failure To Remove A Vehicle From Its Stolen Car Database Results In Another Citizen Staring Down The Barrel Of Several Guns
Re: Re:
It may not be, but including reasonable and NYPD in any kind of inclusive association is just asking for negative responses.
On the post: Is There A Conspiracy Among Legacy Media Companies To Push A False Narrative About Big Tech?
Seriously now
Legacy media attacking social media isn't going to fix their problems. If they think that somehow getting rid of Facebook, Twitter, Google, etc. is going to transfer whatever sources of income they have (advertising, paywalls?) over to themselves is just ridiculous. I don't use social media, but then my use of legacy media is very limited, and mostly through RSS feeds (which don't have advertising). Now I know not everybody is me, nor should we expect large groups to be as circumspect.
The fact is that what is being called 'Big Tech' serves a very different purpose than legacy media, and while one may support the other, they are not in any way interchangeable. Nor are their income sources.
On the post: Is There A Conspiracy Among Legacy Media Companies To Push A False Narrative About Big Tech?
I just knew there was a reason
Well, that explains Twitter.
On the post: Top University Of California Scientists Tell Elsevier They'll No Longer Work On Elsevier Journals
Re: Easy to use != free of work
They didn't say free, did they? But hey, don't let us spoil your outburst.
The number of outlets for various kinds of publication is astonishing, and today it probably isn't even necessary to code it from scratch. I don't know how Sci-Hub works, and it might take more than just one push of a button (I would guess one needs an account and verifiable credentials, or at least position) before someone did CNTRL C, CNTRL V and then push the button to publish.
On the post: Brewery In Wales Changes Name Of 2 Beers After Fight With Hugo Boss
Name brand clothing vs brewery paraphernalia, confusion apparent
I have never considered wearing my beer (and those of you who are snickering and commenting about the spare tire at my middle should cease and desist post haste, you've been warned).
At the same time, I never though about drinking my Hugo Boss shirts.
Confusing beer logo'd wearable's with dress clothing (do they make anything else? not that I've heard of) doesn't even seem possible. Hell, I reject clothing with logo's on them (I want to be paid, a lot, to advertise for someone) (though I did like the clothing that had those little crocodiles on them a long time ago, until they got so uppity in the price category).
On the post: Top University Of California Scientists Tell Elsevier They'll No Longer Work On Elsevier Journals
Re: (sorry not sorry)
Significant golden parachutes might convince the brass at Elsevier, but it would be a really poor investment for the larger corporation. Unless they need a tax break.
On the post: Top University Of California Scientists Tell Elsevier They'll No Longer Work On Elsevier Journals
Re: Re: Re:
Corruption, capitalism; convoluted when conflated, one feeding the other. Tried to separate them with a crowbar, but several politicians objected.
On the post: NY Times Publishes A Second, Blatantly Incorrect, Trashing Of Section 230, A Day After Its First Incorrect Article
Re: The New York Times: 'We will print ANYTHING handed to us'
And here I thought they were working on the efficacy of their paywall.
On the post: Courts Again Shoot Down FCC For Ignoring The Law, Making Up Stuff
Re: Re: While I'm at it
Thank you.
On the post: UK Moves To Give Regulators Power To Fine Internet Companies 5% Of Revenue If They Can't Wave A Magic Wand And Make Bad Content Disappear
Re:
Nanny, ninny, or both?
On the post: Courts Again Shoot Down FCC For Ignoring The Law, Making Up Stuff
While I'm at it
Could we get some kind of update as to exactly where this stands? It seems like it has been 'any day now' for a few months.
On the post: Courts Again Shoot Down FCC For Ignoring The Law, Making Up Stuff
It's like light is shining on the darkness of Pai
Seems like someone's gotten to the root of Pai's modus operandi.
On the post: Emails From License Plate Reader Company Hack Show Lobbyists Writing Legislation And Handing Out Talking Points To Congressional Reps
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Perspective.
One needs to know the perspective of those handing you money.
On the post: Class Action Lawsuit Hopes To Hold GitHub Responsible For Hosting Data From Capital One Breach
Re:
Wouldn't that expose private information? Of course knowing which ones were valid and/or associating any particular number to a particular individual would require some additional information, but, but, but...MY social security number was revealed and I might live in California.
/s
On the post: New Report Further Clarifies Foxconn's Wisconsin Deal Was An Unsustainable Joke
Look, over there...now check out our awesome proposal
This sounds like the benefits given to video (movie/TV) production companies that promise jobs, which turn out to be part time and/or temporary. The end result benefit to the community is significantly less than any economic improvement promised by the outside entity. When will states/communities learn about bait and switch or the flashing bogus promises for what they are?
On the post: Reaping What They Sowed: Recording Industry Now Quite Upset About Copyright Run Amok
Re: Re: Re:
Wouldn't that destroy future generations of MAFFIAA members' ability to fodder their nest...erm...fleece the public...um...enforce copyright?
They not only don't create anything (well they do seem intent on creating havoc, and are pretty good at creating havoc, but it isn't apparent that havoc is copyrightable, but maybe there is a patent opportunity), they merely represent companies that don't create anything. That would seem to diminish the whole concept of life plus seventy five years (which could be confused with life plus cancer when considering future creativity).
Why wouldn't they think of the children (the golden parachutes might be all the explanation needed)?
On the post: Reaping What They Sowed: Recording Industry Now Quite Upset About Copyright Run Amok
Re:
They wouldn't do anything so stupid as destroying their own customers...oh wait!
On the post: Reaping What They Sowed: Recording Industry Now Quite Upset About Copyright Run Amok
Re:
So long as we don't die over copyright.
On the post: Oops: Japan Anti-Piracy Proposals Probably Violate Its Constitution
Simon says, but why does Simon say that?
Sound like the US (and others) war on poverty, drugs, terrorism, etc.. Ill defined parameters, overly consequential reactions, lack of judicial process in determining actual culpability, and just what the intellectual imaginary property 'owners' want.
On the post: NYPD, Prosecutors Illegally Using Expunged Criminal Records To Perform Investigations, Ask For Longer Sentences
Re:
That copyright infringement in the posting of laws only pertained to the annotations made by third parties, not the law itself (right or wrong).That the actual law is available, to the average smart phone (OK finding the relevant law might be beyond the ken of the average user) user makes the law available to everyone. Even cops.
This is in conflict with the Supreme Court decision where cops don't need to know the laws they enforce. Having the law knowingly available on their smart phones would put that concept in the dustbin. The fact that the law is available to individual law enforcement officers brings the question of whether they need to know vs can know to the forefront. What if they did know, but chose to ignore, or worse, did know but didn't care?
They are hired to enforce the law. Not knowing the law they are hired to enforce seems like what they were hired for was not enforcing the law. So what were they hired for?
Next >>