Here you're investing in the infinite supply of Stupid™ but the supply-demand curve jumped the divide-by-zero shark, and now, somehow making more available Stupid™ causing the demand for more Stupid™. Thus this is obviously the most genius investment plan ever as it is obviously a perpetual money (and Stupid™) making scheme!
I know there are at least some cases where a foreign power can sue in US courts. Is there an (at least somewhat reasonable) cause of action that Mexico could pursue against the officers/agency? I am not that optimistic but somehow I think that would be more likely than Congress doing anything to allow foreign citizens to sue federal officers for wrongful if they refuse to do so for US citizens :(
I love how the large Internet providers have shape the discussion. Given how much money has been tossed at them collectively by the public sector to build networks I have a hard time distinguishing between the huge multi-billion partnerships vs the smaller "community" ones. Except that I image that if someone compared how many "boondoggles" happened at a small scale vs say JUST the ones involving Frontier the community ones would come out on top.
There are, of course, also significant Constitutional questions about this. Why should liability for 3rd party content depend on what kind of business model your site uses?
The Constitution only interferes with his garbage and grand-standing well after the sound-bytes have gone out. Who cares about the impact that will happen before the courts deal with it? By that point he'll probably be back up for reelection, and can rant against liberal judges or something.
If I'm understanding it, Parler is working hard to become the space space for people who think the existence of safe spaces are a symptom of everything wrong with this country....
The Senate negotiators, anxious to protect their colleagues from being accused of taking both sides of the question, stood firm. They were willing to accept Cox-Wyden, but Exon would have to be included, too.
And:
With the exception of its most passionate supporters, few tears were shed for the CDA at its final demise in 1997.
It is not exactly new or shocking that it was more important to let Senators look good than to not pass something they apparently all agreed was bad law. The reminder however, is still depressing.
I would just like for there to be more competition. I say it would begin to solve a lot of problems, like DNS privacy. Without competition, outsiders like Mozilla will be the most disruptive factor in this space.
Honestly, I don't care how many options I have. I don't want any of my phone companies being able to record my calls and I don't see why my ISP should be able to record my traffic. Of course the difference is we say that phone calls are protected and the internet is not. I agree that DNS over TLS or HTTPS are good ideas to combat rogue actors. I just have this silly idea that no provider should be able to listen in or record my communications. It does not matter if it is a phone call, a letter, or an IP packet.
Before anyone makes a comment about traffic engineering, I am a network engineer and have worked for ISPs in the past. There is a HUGE difference between marking a packet for QoS and having any actual recording, logging, or any other information about a packet leave the ingress / marking device in any way. After that, my ISP should have zero input to what packets I ask them to carry. If I'm not sending said packets to their devices it's none of their business. Even if my payload is "illegal", well again, we don't allow the phone company to listen in to my calls in order to drop the ones that are making threats or playing music in the background.
In summary, communications should be treated the same no matter the technology, and middle-men in the process should never dig deeper than needed to deliver, even if I am sending a post-card or plain-text packet.
This is basically what I meant. Someone suing the Government saying their First or Fifth Amendment rights were harmed because the Government placed a law that puts liability on a third party if they don't censor based on an accusation. However I already see a potential issue with this as someone could say they already have that liability, this just gives them a quicker out and thus the law doesn't "censor".
I might have missed them, but is there anyone (ok anyone close to sane) challenging the takedown provision on first amendment grounds? I don't even recall if anyone tried before it rolled out as unconstitutional per-se but even if they had it seems obvious that any assumptions used there might be invalid.
You might have been right from the start. Think of all the wallets that will starve if we could use the things we own already for whatever purpose we wanted instead of buying new things. After all, this is obviously the only part of the economy doing well and magic Wall Street numbers are way more important than people. Or something.
You know like Italy, Spain, France, and United Kingdom are all out to destroy our economies with all of that false "Please, don't do what we did. You still have time." nonsense.
This is of course coming from the same place whose Lieutenant Governor is speaking on the behalf of every Grandparent saying they would be cool with dying for their Grandkid's financial benefit or some such.
Nah, I have nothing against profiting from patents in theory. I do have a problem with excessive profits and the many shady things that have been done by organizations producing medicine and medical things. That being said, I have no information to say one way or another if this particular company has done anything I would object to. That doesn't mean that something like this ,added to the recent joy people who need insulin and EpiPens, won't be the trigger for enough public outrage to cause a massive overhaul of the medical patent system.
It is almost like the medical world WANTs the public to finally hit the outrage tipping point to cause their precious monopolies to be stripped from them.
Investing in a divide-by-zero-problem
Here you're investing in the infinite supply of Stupid™ but the supply-demand curve jumped the divide-by-zero shark, and now, somehow making more available Stupid™ causing the demand for more Stupid™. Thus this is obviously the most genius investment plan ever as it is obviously a perpetual money (and Stupid™) making scheme!
I'm curious, but what about Mexico itself?
I know there are at least some cases where a foreign power can sue in US courts. Is there an (at least somewhat reasonable) cause of action that Mexico could pursue against the officers/agency? I am not that optimistic but somehow I think that would be more likely than Congress doing anything to allow foreign citizens to sue federal officers for wrongful if they refuse to do so for US citizens :(
Public-Private Partnerships
I love how the large Internet providers have shape the discussion. Given how much money has been tossed at them collectively by the public sector to build networks I have a hard time distinguishing between the huge multi-billion partnerships vs the smaller "community" ones. Except that I image that if someone compared how many "boondoggles" happened at a small scale vs say JUST the ones involving Frontier the community ones would come out on top.
Re: Re: Confused
Oh good. I was worried for a bit there.
Confused
I must have missed it, what page has the gratuitous RICO complaint?
Who cares about the Constitution, it only applies to lesser gods
The Constitution only interferes with his garbage and grand-standing well after the sound-bytes have gone out. Who cares about the impact that will happen before the courts deal with it? By that point he'll probably be back up for reelection, and can rant against liberal judges or something.
(untitled comment)
Goodness, I wish that applied to the police too.
A safe space
If I'm understanding it, Parler is working hard to become the space space for people who think the existence of safe spaces are a symptom of everything wrong with this country....
Depressed by the reality
Between:
And:
It is not exactly new or shocking that it was more important to let Senators look good than to not pass something they apparently all agreed was bad law. The reminder however, is still depressing.
Re: Re: Re:
Honestly, I don't care how many options I have. I don't want any of my phone companies being able to record my calls and I don't see why my ISP should be able to record my traffic. Of course the difference is we say that phone calls are protected and the internet is not. I agree that DNS over TLS or HTTPS are good ideas to combat rogue actors. I just have this silly idea that no provider should be able to listen in or record my communications. It does not matter if it is a phone call, a letter, or an IP packet.
Before anyone makes a comment about traffic engineering, I am a network engineer and have worked for ISPs in the past. There is a HUGE difference between marking a packet for QoS and having any actual recording, logging, or any other information about a packet leave the ingress / marking device in any way. After that, my ISP should have zero input to what packets I ask them to carry. If I'm not sending said packets to their devices it's none of their business. Even if my payload is "illegal", well again, we don't allow the phone company to listen in to my calls in order to drop the ones that are making threats or playing music in the background.
In summary, communications should be treated the same no matter the technology, and middle-men in the process should never dig deeper than needed to deliver, even if I am sending a post-card or plain-text packet.
Re: Re: Re: Takedown Challenges in progess?
This is basically what I meant. Someone suing the Government saying their First or Fifth Amendment rights were harmed because the Government placed a law that puts liability on a third party if they don't censor based on an accusation. However I already see a potential issue with this as someone could say they already have that liability, this just gives them a quicker out and thus the law doesn't "censor".
Takedown Challenges in progess?
I might have missed them, but is there anyone (ok anyone close to sane) challenging the takedown provision on first amendment grounds? I don't even recall if anyone tried before it rolled out as unconstitutional per-se but even if they had it seems obvious that any assumptions used there might be invalid.
Re: Re: but what if ResMed is right?
You might have been right from the start. Think of all the wallets that will starve if we could use the things we own already for whatever purpose we wanted instead of buying new things. After all, this is obviously the only part of the economy doing well and magic Wall Street numbers are way more important than people. Or something.
Those darn Nation States!
You know like Italy, Spain, France, and United Kingdom are all out to destroy our economies with all of that false "Please, don't do what we did. You still have time." nonsense.
This is of course coming from the same place whose Lieutenant Governor is speaking on the behalf of every Grandparent saying they would be cool with dying for their Grandkid's financial benefit or some such.
https://twitter.com/DanPatrick/status/1242280376069959680
https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/s tatus/1242245135129346050
Re:
Nah, I have nothing against profiting from patents in theory. I do have a problem with excessive profits and the many shady things that have been done by organizations producing medicine and medical things. That being said, I have no information to say one way or another if this particular company has done anything I would object to. That doesn't mean that something like this ,added to the recent joy people who need insulin and EpiPens, won't be the trigger for enough public outrage to cause a massive overhaul of the medical patent system.
Medical Patent SOPA Moment
It is almost like the medical world WANTs the public to finally hit the outrage tipping point to cause their precious monopolies to be stripped from them.
Hacking
Of course, why didn't I think of that! We should all just hack Facebook if it isn't exactly what someone else wants it to be!
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by crinisen.
Submit a story now.
Tools & Services
TwitterFacebook
RSS
Podcast
Research & Reports
Company
About UsAdvertising Policies
Privacy
Contact
Help & FeedbackMedia Kit
Sponsor/Advertise
Submit a Story
More
Copia InstituteInsider Shop
Support Techdirt