This Court holds by reason of the very name of the site, the manner in which it is managed, and the personal comments of defendant Richie, the defendants have specifically encouraged development of what is offensive about the content of the site.
We therefore conclude that a service provider is “responsible” for the development of offensive content only if it in some way specifically encourages the development of what is offensive about the content.
The 9th Cir. was using the word 'offensive' in the sense of 'This action is an offense',i.e., a crime. The 6th Cir. was seeing the word 'offensive' in the sense of 'I am offended by this action'.
Re: Re: You are slowly re-capitulating the good parts of 1980's conservatism.
There's a theory that states the larger the organization, the less personal responsibility each individual member feels towards the success of that organization, thereby enabling the Second Law of Dynamic Laziness: In the absence of sufficient motivation, a person's laziness trends towards maximum entropy.
The MSM aren't individually stupid; there's just no reason for them to do more than the minimum requirement for their employment: reading whatever press release someone hands them.
Likewise with the NSA - it's just easier for them to, for example, walk into the Level 3 Communications office and demand they install a tap, rather than do something cool and clandestine like digging up a fiber bundle out in the woods and actually splicing their own fucking taps.
Maybe doing cryptography for long periods fucks with your brain somehow....the cited article reads like something a bright fifth-grader would come up with.
But wait- what's this? The article was submitted to ireport.cnn by one Jacques Tetu. Who is this mystery man? Find out in the exciting book In Denial: Code Red by Andre Brisson. Here's the teaser:
Dreamers Jacques Têtu and Stéphane Creusat, a quadriplegic, have created the first exponential, quantum computing secure, identity based cryptosystem that can secure the Internet and eliminate cyber crime. They sustain themselves with a security consulting business and by teaching security courses at a local technical college.
Backstop me on this one, but did Brisson use a character from his book to distribute his own article? How deliciously devious!
...but again, perhaps doing too much cryptography turns your brain into chow mien....
One of the fun things about reading a post like this without glasses is coming across the line
...they would be applauding and pooping champagne corks
and have it actually make sense.
Also, Ken missed a great opportunity to dust off his old Henry II hand-puppet and picture Rogers holding it, sighing dramatically and declaiming "Will no one rid me of this troublesome privacy in yon privy?" to his adoring but churlish interns, thus distancing himself from some of the ickier consequences of bathroom camming.
A link from the cited link shows a picture of the physical documents seized during the search. You can plainly see how a folder of papers can be mistaken for a firearm. Thank God I only use a laptop, which as everybody knows can only be mistaken for a pan of lasagna.
Indeed. One can consume a potato; how can one consume an mp3? It's a lazy mental shorthand so freighted with negative connotations that people who use the term must know how insulting it is. But to punch them in the mouth? They deserve to be educated - by 'consuming' say, War & Peace...page by page.
If you replace 'bots' with 'over-caffeinated, commission-paid Warner serfs armed with a one-key Infringement! macro and an uncanny ability to troll YouTube 16 hours a day', then it starts to make sense.
How does the NSA know that this putative 'spam' was not, in fact, a coded general call to jihad? To protect us - the ignorant masses of Americans - the brave cyber-warriors of the NSA MUST read each and every spam.
Press release from the American Aspirin Manufacturers Association, intercepted by SIGINT 14-10-2013 SECRET/ULTRA/SI/SSW
The better question may be, who are we to believe you, when we know for a fact that governments lie, not occasionally but pathologically, and that we know this only through the constant badgering of lying government officials by the press?