NPR's Daniel Schorr Blames The Internet For Ft. Hood Shootings

from the maybe-time-to-hang-up-the-microphone dept

I recognize that NPR news analyst Daniel Schorr is well into his tenth decade of life, and plays the role of the "senior statesman of journalism" on NPR at times, but as a bunch of folks have sent in, he seems to have totally lost it with his recent piece suggesting the internet should share some of the blame for the Ft. Hood shootings done by Maj. Nidal Hasan. The reason? Hasan apparently communicated via email with an "extremist cleric" whom he had met years ago (in person) at a mosque in Northern Virginia. One wonders if they had corresponded by telephone, if Schorr would be questioning if AT&T was to blame. Or, if by pen and paper, if Bic was at fault. Of course, Schorr doesn't even know what was in the emails sent between the two, so his speculation is based on even less than nothing. However, even if his worst fears are true, and the cleric somehow pushed Hasan to carry out his attack, the fault remains with Hasan, and potentially the cleric. Not the internet.

31 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Sheriff Uses Craigslist To Arrest Prostitutes... Blames Craigslist

from the cognitive-dissonance? dept

Reader cKarlGo points us to a story in Florida of local police arresting 28 women and six men on prostitution-related charges, after finding them all on Craigslist. They then used phone and email to negotiate with the women in order to confirm that they were selling sexual acts. Afterwards, they made the arrests. But here's the kicker: the sheriff is still blaming Craigslist:

"How can Craigslist allow this kind of content on their (Web) site and then state "We're not involved in any kind of criminal conduct,""

Well, it's actually quite simple. I would imagine that, right now, somewhere in Sheriff Grady Judd's jurisdiction, there are other prostitutes walking the streets. By Judd's own logic, I should be asking why Polk County is involved in criminal conduct. After all, it's happening in his jurisdiction. It's just that it's happening on the street. Or it might be on Craigslist. But it's neither the fault of the street nor Craigslist -- which is nothing more than a virtual street.

But, more to the point, why isn't Sheriff Judd also blaming the telephone company and his internet provider? After all, Judd used three tools to find and communicate with these prostitutes: Craigslist, email and the telephone. The phone company allowed the prostitutes to make phone calls. Internet providers allowed the prostitutes to email. By Judd's logic they're "involved in criminal activity."

In the meantime, what kind of thought process does it take to use a tool to help you crack down on prostitution, and then blame it for the prostitution? How hard is it for Sheriff Judd to recognize that Craigslist is an incredibly useful tool for his staff to find and arrest prostitutes. You would think that having just used the tool for that very purpose he might realize that it's a great tool for catching prostitutes. So why is he blaming it?

72 Comments | Leave a Comment..

P2P Banned In Antarctica?

from the seems-a-bit-extreme dept

We know that there's been an ongoing effort by entertainment industry lobbyists to convince politicians (and others) that file sharing and P2P apps are somehow to blame for stupid government staffers accidentally leaking files via those programs. Apparently the propaganda campaign has worked in at least one area: employees of the United States Antarctic Program (USAP) were sent an alert that they need to stop using all P2P programs. The "scenarios" described in the note are the same ones that entertainment industry lobbying group Arts+Labs has been spewing for a few years now. However, rather than assume that the real lesson is that users should actually understand the software they're using on their computer, and make sure not to use it in a dumb way (such as exposing sensitive documents), the director of IT simply told everyone that while on Antarctica, they must disable any P2P apps on their computer. Hope no one there uses Skype to keep in touch with family...

76 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Misplaced Blame In Copyright Infringement Claim Over Plagiarized Website

from the why-not-blame-the-actual-party? dept

Rose M. Welch alerts us to a court case where two law firms are fighting over a copied web page. There seems to be no question at all that the website of one law firm used almost an exact copy of some text from another law firm's website. So that would make it a pretty clear cut case. But... there's a bit of a complication. The law firm who used the copied content didn't realize the content was copied. It had hired an outside firm to build the website, and someone at that firm copied the content in creating the website. An arbiter ruled that the development firm was 2/3 responsible, but that the law firm was still 1/3 responsible, and the case has now shifted from arbitration to court. The problem is that it still seems difficult to see why the law firm should be liable at all. The folks they hired to create the website did the actual copying, and the law firm had no idea. So why should they take the blame?

29 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Once Again, Congress Wants To Blame Limewire For Stupid Staffers, As Arts+Labs Propaganda Campaign Works

from the limewire-ain't-the-problem dept

This started a few years ago, when suddenly grandstanding Congress-folk started blaming Limewire for "leaking" a confidential terrorist threat assessment. Of course, that was misguided. The problem wasn't Limewire (or any file sharing software), but idiotic gov't employees who (a) put file sharing software on gov't computers (b) didn't properly wall off the software and (c) put confidential info where it could be shared. Earlier this year, suddenly, the issue came up again (again targeting Limewire). It was instigated by some aggressive entertainment industry lobbyists, who have concocted this huge story about how Limewire is to blame. And politicians always seem willing to buy it.

The latest is that some in Congress are planning legislation after claiming that "Secret Service safehouse locations, military rosters, and IRS tax returns" were available via Limewire (funny... those are the same things mentioned in the PR email I got from the entertainment industry lobbyist's PR person...).

Our Congressional critters tried to one up each other in stupid proposals, with one, Rep. Bill Foster, even tossing out the idea of passing a law to block the Gnutella protocol (though, he admitted it wasn't likely to work). Others just planned to pass laws that would ban the use of file sharing software on gov't computers (you need a law for that?!?) and to have the FTC investigate Limewire. And, of course, the real goal in all of this, politicians want to pass a law demanding that the gov't "undertake a national campaign to educate consumers about the dangers of file sharing software."

That last one, of course, is actually the end-goal here. The entertainment industry and their shills such as the group Arts+Labs (who was behind much of this campaign) have been demonizing file sharing software completely, and now want the gov't to help. So the best way to do that was to find some folks who misused the software, get some headlines about how P2P software "exposed" Obama's safehouse locations and then get the gov't to put in place some entertainment industry propaganda. Arts+Labs wins completely. It's backers include the various entertainment firms (bonus! gov't pitching their propaganda story) and a few tech companies who sell filtering/blocking technology (bonus! gov't increasing demand for their technology).

39 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Latest Thing To Blame On Google? Koi Thieves

from the time-to-blur-the-koi-ponds dept

It seems these days you can try to blame just about anything on Google. The latest? Koi thieves. Yes, the highly sought after colorful fish are apparently disappearing at a higher-than-normal clip, including from some decently secluded koi ponds. Thus, the police have decided that it must be the fault of Google Earth, allowing the dastardly carp criminals to scout out their targets. Google, for its part, points out that Google Earth merely presents publicly available satellite imagery via its app, suggesting, correctly, that it's a bit unfair to blame Google just because Google presents the same data in a way that others could find elsewhere.

22 Comments | Leave a Comment..

If You Get Shot, You Don't Get To Blame Craigslist For Hosting An Ad For The Gun Dealer Where The Shooter Bought The Gun

from the wow dept

We've discussed in the past what we refer to as "Steve Dallas lawsuits." The name comes from an old Bloom County comic strip (which to date, I've been unable to find online, but recall pretty clearly in my head -- but, uh, internet help me out -- can anyone find a copy of this strip? -- see update below), following a storyline where the character Steve Dallas is punched out by actor Sean Penn for trying to take Penn's photo. In the strip, Dallas (a lawyer) discusses who to sue for his injuries from the attack. He rules out most of the obvious candidates for one reason or another (including Penn), before finally settling on the manufacturer of his camera (if I remember correctly, it was Nikon) for failing to put a warning label on the camera, that taking pictures of celebrities may lead to them beating you up. The point: you always sue some big company, no matter how tangentially related to the case, because they're the ones with the money. Update: The punchout storyline begins here, and the actual "who to sue" comic was printed a couple months later here. My memory was slightly off. It wasn't "Nikon" but the company was the made up name "Nikolta" (a mix of Nikon and Minolta, I guess). Still, pretty good memory for something that was printed 23 years ago. Thanks for the help in the comments finding it!

Hence, "Steve Dallas lawsuits." However, in all of the past such lawsuits we've discussed around here, I don't think I've ever seen one that was as big a stretch as this one. A guy who got shot sued Craigslist, because apparently the shooter bought his gun from a gun dealer who advertised on Craigslist. Think about that for a second. At this point we're already twice removed from a reasonable defendant. Could you make an argument against the gun dealer? Even that seems like a stretch (though I'm not all that familiar with gun laws these days). But to go even further and blame Craigslist? That seems preposterous. And, thankfully, the court agreed. It quickly tossed out the lawsuit on Section 230 safe harbors, but you have to wonder if that was even needed, given the fact that Craigslist had nothing at all to do with the shooting.

44 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Guy Sets Up The Rape of His Wife -- But It's Craigslist That Gets The Attention

from the blame-game dept

A North Carolina man has been arrested after allegedly arranging for his wife to be raped via Craigslist, a story that's sure to give more ammo to the "blame Craigslist" crowd. What's clear from the details is that, if the reported details of the crime are true, this guy is pretty evil: apparently he posted a couple of ads on the site "in an effort to arrange for someone to come to his home and have sex with his wife using some type of scare tactic." When police responded to a 911 call saying an armed man was sexually assaulting a woman in the house, the guy was present. While Craigslist gets the mention in the headline -- and will likely catch flak for it -- it's hard to believe that a person capable of such an act did it just because Craigslist was available. What doesn't get too much mention, though, is the usefulness of the Craigslist ads (again) have in investigating and prosecuting the guy.

Carlo Longino is an expert at the Insight Community. To get insight and analysis from Carlo Longino and other experts on challenges your company faces, click here.

32 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Police Blame Video Games For 2-Year-Old Stabbing 5-Month-Old

from the evidence? dept

It seems that whenever there's any kind of violence involving kids, someone rushes to blame video games. Steve L points us to the latest such case, where it's taken to something of an extreme. Apparently a 2-year-old boy stabbed his 5-month-old brother with a knife. It sounds like he didn't do much damage, but police immediately claimed that violent video games owned by a much older teenaged brother "may have played a role." The only problem? The 2-year-old neither plays the games nor watches his older brother playing them. But, why not blame the video games?

68 Comments | Leave a Comment..

South Carolina Wants To Put Craigslist Management In Jail?

from the craig-doesn't-strike-me-as-the-jailhouse-type... dept

In the latest in an increasingly long line of misplaced attacks on Craigslist, South Carolina's Attorney General Henry McMaster is now threatening the company's principals with criminal charges because of how some folks have used the site. Someone should send McMaster a copy of section 230 of the CDA. You would think that a state Attorney General might... you know... know the law, before threatening to put people in jail. McMaster, of course, is running for governor of the state, so he likely sees this as a grandstanding opportunity -- just like he recently massively overhyped the risks of online predators. Someone else submitted the fact that McMaster also was so upset that a study that he (and most other state AGs) requested on the risks of online predators showed that the risks were greatly overstated that, rather than admit he was wrong, he withdrew from the workgroup studying the issue. This does not appear to be a fact-based individual. When presented with evidence, he simply says it can't be true.

In this case, he's accusing Craigslist of being involved with prostitution, even though plenty of other (smarter) law enforcement officials have recognized that Craigslist is actually a useful tool in fighting prostitution, rather than a problem. He also claims that Craigslist management may be criminally liable due to "sexually explicit" photos hosted on the site. Except... as the link above points out, as long as the content isn't "obscene" (and McMaster presents no evidence that it is), then it's perfectly legal, and protected by the First Amendment. The whole thing stinks of a politician grandstanding by displaying his own ignorance of both technology and the law... all while running for governor.

85 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Attorneys General Ramp Up Misguided Attacks On Craigslist

from the it-ain't-the-tool dept

This should come as no surprise at all, but following the mad rush to blame Craigslist for the fact that a psychopath used the site to find women to murder, various Attorneys General are falsely trying to pin some blame on Craigslist and get it to take actions that won't help at all. Both Illinois' Attorney General and Connecticut's Attorney General (who has a history of wrongly blaming Craigslist) are calling for the site to shutter the "erotic services" section.

If you don't think too much, you can see why people might think this makes sense. After all, some of the services being offered on those sites are illegal. But does that mean that those actions stop once Craigslist stops accepting those ads? Of course not. As we saw last year when Craigslist was pressured into restricting that section, those who are in the market for erotic services simply move elsewhere, and in scattering them around, it actually makes it that much more difficult for law enforcement to monitor the activity and stop it from happening. We've pointed to a few examples of police actively using Craigslist as a tool to track down lawbreakers. It's hard to understand why these Attorneys General are trying to take that tool away from the police. Craigslist cooperates with law enforcement, and gives law enforcement an easy way to track and deal with illegal activity. Shutting down parts of Craigslist doesn't help. It doesn't stop the illegal activity -- it just makes it that much harder to track and stop.

18 Comments | Leave a Comment..

It Had To Happen: Blame Craigslist Gang Comes Out

from the learn-to-differentiate... dept

You knew it was going to happen. Following the stories about the guy in Boston who was allegedly killing women he found via Craigslist (leading some to refer to him as "the Craigslist killer," eventually people were going to start incorrectly suggesting that Craigslist deserves some of the blame. Mark sends in the news that Massachusetts Attorney General Martha Coakley has stepped up to the challenge. While she starts off by noting how helpful Craigslist can be in tracking down criminals, she quickly changes tone and suggests the company may be a part of the problem:

"I can't say they haven't been helpful. On the other hand, they are the enablers. It's all well and good to say we'll help when we're called upon . . . but in light of what's happened in Boston and around the country, it may be time for a little closer look or oversight."

Of course, that makes no sense. Crimes of this nature have gone on for ages. In fact, the details sound quite similar to the famous Jack the Ripper story. Correct me if I'm wrong, but Jack didn't use Craigslist, did he? Nor did anyone think to blame the street corners where Jack the Ripper found the prostitutes he murdered. So why are we suddenly blaming the digital equivalent?

45 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Want To Know Why Newspapers Are Dying? Maureen Dowd Shows Us

from the physician-heal-thyself dept

In her recent New York Times op-ed, Maureen Dowd takes aim at Google, blaming it for the sorry state of the newspaper industry. Perhaps in hopes of winning people over to the newspapers' side in the argument over how much Google should be profiting from their content, Dowd spends a lot of the article attempting to make the reader fear Google, trying to paint the company as anti-privacy and bent on "world domination."

But there is a vaguely ominous Big Brother wall in the lobby of the headquarters here that scrolls real-time Google searches -- porn queries are edited out -- from people around the world. You could probably see your own name if you stayed long enough. In one minute of watching, I saw the Washington association where my sister works, the Delaware beach town where my brother vacations, some Dave Matthews lyrics, calories Panera, females feet, soaps in depth and Douglas Mangum, whoever he is.

The uselessness of this statement is hard to overstate. If you stayed long enough you'd see your name? She saw the names of places where her sister works and her brother vacations? Ever look at a phone book or a map, Maureen? All she was seeing was evidence that people are looking for information.

And that is where Google adds value: it helps to connect people with the information they want. If Dowd would just pause the dramatics long enough, maybe she would recognize that this concept sounds very familiar. Just like newspapers have always done, Google tries to find information that its users want, and deliver it to them in a way that is useful -- and news stories are just one example of what people want Google to find for them. Dowd quotes Rupert Murdoch calling what Google does "stealing." But, Google is no more "stealing" the information to which it links than newspapers steal the events on which they report. It does not take much thinking to see the parallels. But hey, why take time to think when you can engage in some juicy fear-mongering and hyperbole?

Like many others, Dowd also makes the mistake of equating the decline of newspapers with the end of journalism, ignoring the evidence that says this is simply not true. We've already pointed out examples of how journalism can not only survive but thrive apart from physical newspapers. Newspapers were valuable when they were the most convenient, useful way to deliver the news. The content itself was always practically free. But the value of the content was used draw eyeballs to ads -- to give advertisers paid access to the community of readers. With the newspaper format now dying, entrepreneurs will find new ways to leverage the still-existent value of the free content to sell something scarce.

Fear-mongering, making misleading statements, ignoring evidence, not understanding your own business -- it's ironic that, while attempting to blame others for the woes of her own industry, Dowd makes so many of the mistakes that are really contributing to its decline.

52 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Stop Blaming Google For Your Own Mistakes

from the say-it-loud dept

With plenty of attention going towards Eric Schmidt's attempt to convince newspapers that Google is helping, rather than hurting them, the much more interesting thing to read is Danny Sullivan's absolutely brilliant outpouring of frustration to newspaper industry execs and publishers, thinking back to a presentation he gave to (as he describes it) "a hostile audience" a few years ago -- where they were all missing the point. And, they're still bringing up the exact same wrong points today. Sullivan gets it exactly right. He takes the industry to task for lashing out (incorrectly) at everyone else for their problems, rather than recognizing that they're the ones who need to change in order to keep up with the market. The problems they're facing aren't because of Google or blogs. It's because they haven't kept up and haven't kept serving their market. In fact, he points out how much Google loves newspapers, and the newspapers are doing everything to spit back in Google's face:

I also explained that unlike virtually all other publishers on the internet, newspapers were given extraordinary special status with Google. They were among the very select few to be admitted into Google News and receive the huge amounts of traffic it could send their ways. That many small blogs with excellent content struggle for admittance that these other publishers just got handed to them on a silver platter.

My favorite part, though, may be Danny's response to the silly idea that newspapers should take their content offline for a week. We discussed that back in February, but Danny gets to the heart of the matter:

Please get all your newspaper colleagues to agree to a national "Just say no to Google" week. I beg you, please do it. Then I can see if these things I think will happen do happen:

• Papers go "oh shit," we really get a lot of traffic from Google for free, and we actually do earn something off those page views
• Papers go "oh shit," turns out people can find news from other sources
• Papers go "oh shit," being out of Google didn't magically solve all our other problems overnight, but now we have no one else to blame.

Indeed. But there seems to be some sort of incredible "logic blindness" that blocks newspaper industry execs from getting these simple facts.

36 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Don't Blame Google And Scribd For Your Own Business Model Problems

from the try-this-on-for-size dept

Another weekend goes by and another old school newspaper guy writes a long screed condemning Google as a menace hellbent on destroying all that is good and right in the news business. This one, by Henry Porter in The Guardian is particularly amusing due to the logical inconsistencies within. It starts out, first, with a rehashing of the misguided attack on Scribd, where Porter seems to blame Scribd for actions of its users (who knew it was so difficult to separate out the drivers from the automakers). To him, Scribd is pure evil:

it still allows individuals to advertise services for delivering pirated books by email, which must make it the enemy of every writer and publisher in the world. In effect it has turned copyright law on its head: instead of asking publishers for permission, it requires them to object if and when they become aware of a breach.

Yes, that's why many authors and publishers are using Scribd to help promote their books. Apparently the fact that Scribd might be useful never occurred to Porter. It's the same complaint by plenty of folks who refuse to even think about new business model possibilities, to immediately condemn any useful new service as killing off any hope of a business model even as those willing to embrace the technology are finding it enhances rather than diminishes their opportunities.

Then, right after he complains that Scribd isn't doing enough to prevent books from getting online, he complains about Google for the exact opposite thing:

Google presents a far greater threat to the livelihood of individuals and the future of commercial institutions important to the community.... When the Performing Rights Society demanded more money for music videos streamed from the website, Google reacted by refusing to pay the requested 0.22p per play and took down the videos of the artists concerned.

This is the very next paragraph. So, let me get the logic straight: Scribd is a problem because it allows books to be posted online without permission and doesn't do enough to take them down. Google, on the other hand, is a problem because it has taken down music videos rather than leaving them up and simply paying.

So, apparently, the lesson of the day is that content creators should be able to demand a specific amount of money from any service provider for actions done by their users (not the service provider itself), and if that service provider can't pay up, too bad. Oh, and then, of course, there's the popular claim of the content creator that Google adds no value:

Google is in the final analysis a parasite that creates nothing, merely offering little aggregation, lists and the ordering of information generated by people who have invested their capital, skill and time.

Fair enough. If it adds no real value, then remove your works from Google, Mr. Porter. But, the truth is Mr. Porter is wrong and he knows it deep down inside. If Google "created nothing" and offered no value, no one would use it. But the fact is that it creates tremendous value, hence all of the usage, including some that drives traffic to Mr. Porter's weakly argued, poorly reasoned rant. The fact that Mr. Porter or his bosses are somehow unable to capitalize on that traffic is their fault alone, not Google's.

25 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Kids Involved In Murder Plot? Blame The Internet And Mobile Phones!

from the say-what-now? dept

What is it with curmudgeonly journalists who jump at any opportunity to blame the internet? JJ sends in a link to a bizarre column by Christie Blatchford in Toronto's Globe and Mail where she appears to simply go off on all of "cyberspace" due to something having to do with a murder... though, the connection isn't clear at all. Perhaps this is par for the course for Blatchford, who we also mentioned last year when she wrote a nasty column slamming blogging and the idea that readers might want to comment on news stories. To her, "journalism is a monologue." Yet, this latest column seems somewhat disconnected from reality. It pieces together a few separate and somewhat unrelated things to effectively try to indict the entire internet and internet culture for the death of a teen.

To be honest, Blatchford (the professional) does a pretty poor job even explaining what she's so upset about -- but she seems pretty sure that it's the internet to blame. From what I can gather, a woman (or maybe a teen? it's not clear) was killed by a teen, and another teen was convicted of first degree murder for being the "mastermind." Fair enough.

So why is the internet evil?

From what I can parse out, there are four main complaints:

1. Friends of the convicted girl have set up a Facebook group supporting her, despite her conviction.
2. They dared to use her real name as you would expect friends to do -- rather than obeying the Youth Criminal Justice Act, which forbids naming such juvenile offenders.
3. The messages in support from her friends have terrible spelling and grammar.
4. The two teens involved in the murder text messaged each other a lot -- including at least two conversations where they discuss going to the bathroom, and a few conversations where they discuss sexual acts.

And, that's about it. But, you see, all this points out how the internet is such an evil influence. In fact, Blatchford seems quite upset that in the trial convicting the girl, no one has focused on "the role that was played by the web - enabling and empowering at the least" the murder itself. First, it's unclear what the first three awful points raised above had to do with the internet's influence on the murder itself. As for the final point -- it's about SMS text messaging rather than "the web" (but I guess we shouldn't expect a luddite to distinguish), and it's still not clear what role it actually had (if anything). The same conversations could have (and perhaps would have) taken place via voice over the phone as well if SMS wasn't around. These kids were obviously troubled, but there doesn't seem to be any indication (at least from what's presented) that technology (let alone the web) had anything to do with it, whatsoever. But why should that stop an angry columnist from blaming it?

33 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Blaming Failure On The System Actually Does Have Some Benefits...

from the before-we-trash-everything-here... dept

A bunch of folks have sent in Daniel Gross' excellent review of the World Economic Forum in Davos last week, where he bemoans the fact that no one is willing to step up and take the blame (or even find people who should shoulder the blame) for the economic collapse we're all living through. He has a great line near the beginning:

Success is the work of Great Men and Great Women, while failure can be pinned on the system.

Indeed, in reading the article, I definitely agreed, and sometimes I find it troubling that we credit success stories to individuals who were often much more lucky than anyone cares to imagine, and when failure occurs, no one's willing to admit that they had any part in it. However, in thinking about it some more, I'm less and less sure that this is a bad thing. In many ways, it's actually an important part of creating future success stories.

If we went around blaming individuals for every failure, it creates tremendous incentives not to take on the necessary risk to create those next breakthroughs. The difference between success and failure is often such a fine line it's difficult to see. In almost every success story you hear of one or two minor things that could have brought the whole thing crashing down if things had gone differently. But in celebrating the "heroes" associated with success, we create incentives for others to experiment and take necessary risks. In not punishing the individuals behind the failures too harshly by calling them out for "blame" we don't create incentives to avoid those necessary risks. That's a good thing.

That isn't to say that we shouldn't look at what happened and why it went wrong, but it's right to look at the systems that went wrong and how to fix them, rather than calling out people to tar and feather. That's counter-productive and only makes it that much more difficult to encourage the next generation of entrepreneurs to take the necessary risks to create economic growth.

Of course, there is one additional point that needs to be made here. Despite what I said above, there is a significant problem when we interpret that initial sentence to mean we should then socialize the loss -- and pin the effects of it on taxpayers, which seems to be exactly what this country has done all too often.

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Are 419 Victims Guilty Of Fraud If They Recruit Others?

from the legal-questions dept

One of our readers, Stack, sent in a link to this story about an Australian couple arrested for their participation in recruiting others into a Nigerian 419 scam. Stack suggested in his submission that it was a case of a 419 victim who, having "learned" the scam then turned around and started scamming others. But, from the description I'm not so sure that's the case. Instead, it sounds like the couple was really convinced that the scam was real, and merely convinced others to join in the scam, as well, in order to collect the "necessary" money to free the (non-existent) millions in Nigeria (or whereever this particular scammer claimed the money was).

This raises some interesting questions. If my read is correct, then the couple in question certainly didn't profit from the scam at all, and didn't even know they were being scammed. As we've seen in the past, victims of 419 scams are often so convinced by the scam that even when the whole thing is explained to them, they still believe the scammers are willing to give them money -- something that's been found to be true in historical scams like the infamous Drake's Fortune.

However, if that's the case, the couple in question didn't know it was a scam, and wasn't directly profiting from getting others involved (though, they ignorantly thought they were). So... are they victims or are they scammers? Or both?

13 Comments | Leave a Comment..

'The Video Game Made Me Kill My Parents' Defense Rejected

from the phew dept

All too often these days, we've seen murderers try to pass off the blame for their crimes by blaming video games. This comes after years of techno panic around weak and often misinterpreted studies concerning links between video games and violence. Despite the fact that there's been no actual evidence that video games lead to increased violence (and the fact that youth violence has continually dropped as video games became more popular should be quite telling), it makes for a great news story -- and, thus, a great excuse for murderers. Luckily, no one's buying it.

In the latest such case, where teen-aged Daniel Petric shot both his parents, killing his mother and wounding his father, after they took away his copy of Halo 3, a judge has rejected Petric's claim that it was his video game addiction that inspired the murder (and subsequent attempt to frame his father). It probably didn't help the teen's case at all that there was evidence he had planned the murder for weeks, rather than spontaneously acting following the video game confiscation. The judge still does, unfortunately, suggest that the video game warped Petric's mind, despite little proof that was true. However, the judge notes that even if he was under the influence of the video game, that's no defense for what he did.

In the meantime, of course, politicians are still overreacting to the still unproven idea that video games lead to violence -- to the point that Rep. Joe Baca has introduced a law that would require health warnings on video games, similar to cigarette warnings, saying that: "WARNING: Excessive exposure to violent video games and other violent media has been linked to aggressive behavior."

So, it certainly looks like politicians and the media will continue overreacting when it comes to video games and violence.

50 Comments | Leave a Comment..

Incentives Align To Create Bubbles

from the blame-game-not-necessary dept

In the latest financial crisis, we've seen even more focus on casting blame than following most financial crises. It may be because of the sheer size of the mess this time, and it may be because the events that led up to this mess are a lot more difficult to understand than in the past -- and may even feel more nefarious. However, the deeper you look into the crisis, the harder it is to directly assign blame for the majority of the mess. Yes, there were scammers and fraud on the margins, but for the most part, everyone was doing things in a way that makes sense. This, among other things, is a key point brought out by Henry Blodget's article in The Atlantic about why these types of collapses happen so often. Basically, there is some amount of irrationality in the system, but over time, as more and more people seem to be making money against the irrationality, more and more explanations are made for why that irrationality is actually rational. And since the irrational activity goes on for so long, it becomes nearly impossible for most people to really believe that things are so irrational. So, it's not that there's anyone who did anything wrong that needs to be blamed, so much as we need to blame ourselves, for not taking enough time to recognize that what seems irrational in the beginning actually is irrational.

Of course, along those lines, it's important to realize that, as painful as market corrections like this are going to be, the end result is often beneficial. During the bubble period, lots of money gets thrown at certain things (infrastructure or products) that post-bubble are available for quite a discount. Bubbles help build up new institutions, and even if the original investments get washed away, something good often comes out of them in the end. It may not be clear yet how this financial crisis will eventually work out, but now is a decent time to be looking for opportunity in the carnage rather than worrying about who to blame.

14 Comments | Leave a Comment..