Coises 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (80)

• On the post: DailyDirt: Quantum Computing Works Now (Sorta)

  

  Coises ( profile ), 12 Dec, 2015 @ 12:09am

  Re: Re: Re: I have to wonder where this is going...

  Thank you for the post-quantum cryptography link. I see they’re way ahead of me.

• On the post: DailyDirt: Quantum Computing Works Now (Sorta)

  

  Coises ( profile ), 10 Dec, 2015 @ 11:21pm

  I have to wonder where this is going...

  This could be just dystopian fantasy, but somehow I suspect that one of the kinds of problems quantum computing will be set to solve will be cracking encryption that is presently computationally unfeasible to break.
  
  Possibly we’re seeing the first steps toward what will be the end of privacy and security based on mathematics.

• On the post: FCC Approval Of Zero Rating Shows Companies Can Still Violate Neutrality Under New Rules, They Just Have To Be More Clever About It

  

  Coises ( profile ), 06 Mar, 2015 @ 04:12pm

  Market Discipline

  It’s not the “zero rating” that’s the problem; it’s the data caps and over-quota charges—which, as Techdirt often notes, are in turn just symptoms of lack of competition.
  
  When you can’t treat the disease, it often makes sense to treat the symptoms... but you still want to get as close to the problem as possible.
  
  Imagine that there were perfect competition among broadband providers. Data caps and over-quota charges, if they existed at all, would have to reflect real operating costs. “Zero rating” would then represent shifting some of those costs from the consumer to the service (for which the consumer also pays in some fashion). Large, established content providers might then be able to avail themselves of some business models not available to small independents... but that’s always the case.
  
  What makes this a problem is that there is no competition to constrain the use of data caps and over-quota charges. The FCC shouldn’t bother with zero rating; it should require last mile providers to demonstrate that consumer-facing impediments like data caps and over-quota charges reflect real costs of doing business, and do so in the fairest and least disruptive feasible way. Where market discipline is absent, effective regulation must stand in for it.

• On the post: 'Officer Awareness' Memo: Police Accountability Recording App Could Lead To Dangerous 'Flash Mobs'

  

  Coises ( profile ), 02 Mar, 2015 @ 11:03am

  Deeper Problem

  Both apps will notify other app users within a defined area if someone has activated their app, with the exact location of the police action. This may result in officer safety issues if community groups are able to pinpoint various police actions, and respond to the location in the form of a flash mob.

  I.e., If the community were to know where we are and what we’re doing, they might join forces and attack us.
  
  Have police become so accustomed to thinking of themselves as an occupying force—rather than as community servants—that they don’t even see the problem with that?

• On the post: A Bit Late, But Lenovo CTO Admits The Company Screwed Up

  

  Coises ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2015 @ 05:01pm

  Actions speak louder than words

  Dear Lenovo,
  
  If you really regret Superfish (and not just the fact that it was discovered), I have a simple way you can demonstrate your integrity:
  
  As soon as possible, begin offering all of your Windows computers–every single one–with a “clean install” option that includes nothing but Windows, Windows updates and WHQL-certified drivers. Not so much as a custom desktop background image added.
  
  If you have software other than WHQL-certified drivers that you believe enhances the operation of the machine, make it a downloadable install, and keep it granular (e.g., don’t bundle uncertified drivers we need with apps we don’t).
  
  Let us see how much more you have to charge without subsidies from bloatware and adware vendors and make the decision for ourselves which is the better value.
  
  I think you’d win back a lot of respect... and maybe force some other OEMs to play catch-up.

• On the post: Hollywood Narrow-Mindedly Sees Google Fiber As A Threat, Not A World Of New Opportunities

  

  Coises ( profile ), 31 Dec, 2014 @ 09:43pm

  Pirates -> authorized viewers

  Netflix streaming costs less than a good Usenet provider, and it’s much easier to use.
  
  Netflix streaming costs 2.5-3 times the cost of a decent VPN that will allow one to run BitTorrent in peace... but again, it’s much easier to use.
  
  If the goal were to convert pirates into authorized viewers, I think even Hollywood could figure out how to do it.
  
  I suspect the explanation for this paradox is somehow connected to “Hollywood accounting.”

• On the post: DOJ Says No NSA Help Was Needed To Find Dread Pirate Roberts Since He Misconfigured His CAPTCHAs

  

  Coises ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2014 @ 12:18pm

  Competence

  “It does not matter that Ulbricht intended to conceal the IP address of the SR Server from public view. He failed to do so competently, and as a result the IP address was transmitted to another party – which turned out to be the FBI – who could lawfully take notice of it.”
  
  So, the next time there is a charge that someone has accessed content by circumventing digital protection measures put it place by the copyright holders... can we argue that they (obviously) failed to do so competently?

• On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia

  

  Coises ( profile ), 06 Aug, 2014 @ 12:04pm

  Time to call Chief Inspector Jacques Clouseau...

  “There was some question as to whether the beggar or his minkey was breaking the leu.”

• On the post: President Obama Claims CIA Torture Was Okay Because People Were Scared And The CIA Is A 'Tough Job'

  

  Coises ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2014 @ 10:36am

  Any other crime?

  Imagine any other crime, and think about whether or not you'd have someone say it was okay because there was "enormous pressure" on the people committing the crime. Imagine any other crime, and being told "not to feel too sanctimonious" because of what a "tough job" any other criminal had.
  
  Homicide in the course of protecting one’s home and family, where there is doubt as to whether the action was excessive, or justifiable homicide by reason of self-defense.
  
  America went batshit after 9/11; thirteen years later, the “normal” to which we have returned isn’t really normal at all. I’m much more concerned with ending the permanent state of emergency and devising better structures so we don’t lose our shit again the next time something unprecedented happens than I am with identifying scapegoats for a hysteria in which most of the nation was complicit.
  
  If our President were doing anything to put an end to the permanent state of emergency and to use the lessons of the Bush administration to develop ways to make sure we won’t lose our shit again, I’d happily accept leaving it at that.

• On the post: Awesome Stuff: Crowdfunding To Get Money Out Of Politics… Now With Steve Wozniak!

  

  Coises ( profile ), 22 Jun, 2014 @ 01:52pm

  Re: I'm not really liking this

  If they are working for re-election (what the people want) rather than doing the right thing (what people need) it gets back to the old Roman bread and circuses. What people want is a free lunch. What they need is training on how to make lunch and grow the veggies to make it. One gets you re-elected, the other makes the country better.

  That cuts to the heart of it.
  
  Can any form of real democracy work? (?Real? meaning that the idea of rule by the people is implemented seriously; as opposed to Democracy Theater, in which the object is to go through the motions of democratic process in order prop up the peasants? belief in the moral authority of government, while keeping things organized so that the ignorant masses can?t actually do much damage.)
  
  If it can, can we find a way to make it work here?
  
  I agree (at least, I think this is agreement) that there is a disturbing disconnect between what it takes to get elected or reelected and what it takes to do the job for which one is elected. We elect those who campaign best, not those who govern best.
  
  Is your argument that without the need to maintain the approval of the people, at least once their last campaign is over, elected officials would be free to ignore the foolish folks who voted for them and do ?the right thing,? should the mood strike them? I really can?t see that as being much help.
  
  I can see how one might argue that getting big money out of elections wouldn?t do much to help either, because the problem is really with the electorate: the campaigns just reflect that. Our political dysfunction is not a superficial one that will respond to minor procedural tweaks alone.
  
  I don?t think MayDay.us could be the step that makes democracy work here. I think it just might be the first step.

• On the post: Awesome Stuff: Crowdfunding To Get Money Out Of Politics… Now With Steve Wozniak!

  

  Coises ( profile ), 21 Jun, 2014 @ 11:52pm

  Re: I'm not really liking this

  I have trouble understanding how term limits would help anything.
  
  Surely one of our major influence problems is the ?revolving door? syndrome. So long as a politician can be reelected, he or she has some incentive to please voters. Term limits would assure that no elected representative could hold office long before the primary question of interest would become, ?What next??

• On the post: Tom Wheeler Revising His Net Neutrality Plans… But Not Actually Fixing Them

  

  Coises ( profile ), 12 May, 2014 @ 05:46pm

  Focus on the last mile, not the Internet

  Focus on the last mile, not the Internet
  
  Two things (still) bother me:
  
  1. Everybody is worried about ?fast lanes.? Maybe... I?m concerned that no one seems to be thinking about data caps.
  
  ?Oh, your service offers unlimited access to beautiful, high definition movies that weigh in at about 4GB an hour? Well, we cap our users at 80GB/month, so if they don?t do anything else on the Internet, they can watch one every three days or so before we start threatening to cancel their account. Of course, we could work out a deal where traffic from *your* service is exempt...?
  
  Combine that with special peering arrangements, and it could look ?commercially reasonable.?
  
  2. Considering what a bang-up job the FCC has done with broadcast TV, radio, etc., the idea of reclassification of broadband Internet service makes me think, ?Be careful what you wish for.? What should be reclassified is the last mile?regardless of whether it?s carrying ?cable-TV? channels, video-on-demand, voice communication, Internet traffic or something we haven?t even invented yet. Those who operate the physical infrastructure that almost unavoidably monopolizes the best path connecting citizens in their homes to the rest of the world are a prime candidate for tough regulation; the Internet is not, and should be left the hell alone.
  
  If that requires forcing physical infrastructure providers to be separate from ISPs and content providers... sounds good to me.
  
  (However, equal access rules made DSL ISPs viable until the FCC dropped them in 2005. Resurrecting those rules and applying them to all forms of last mile connection, for all forms of data that are technologically feasible on the connection in question, might be a good start.)
  
  Then, forget worrying about paid prioritization or data caps (and probably a few other things we haven?t thought of yet). If people have a real choice (of ISPs), they can decide what works for them. It?s the last mile monopoly that makes everything else a problem. The last mile can, and should, be content-agnostic.

• On the post: FCC's Tom Wheeler Says He'll Ask For Public Comment On Whether It's Appropriate To Reclassify Broadband

  

  Coises ( profile ), 10 May, 2014 @ 02:23pm

  Re: Dear Tom Wheeler,

  ?What you should be asking is whether there's a valid competition reason not to reclassify the last-mile ISPs as common carriers or utilities.?
  
  On the mark, except change ?ISPs? to ?providers.?
  
  Remember that before 2005, independent ISPs had equal access to DSL lines (though not to cable or fiber). ISPs can exist in a competitive market; it?s only because the FCC has allowed last-mile providers to use their natural monopoly to control access to their lines that there is essentially no such market.
  
  At present and for the foreseeable future, physical lines can deliver speeds and capacities unattainable by other means; likewise, fiber outclasses coax and coax outclasses twisted pair. It should not matter what the last mile is delivering. There needn?t be a monopoly on Internet service, or television packages, or video on demand, or voice communication or any other kind of one- or two-way information flow, just because there is a monopoly on the physical infrastructure.
  
  Correct me if I?m wrong, economists, but I believe one of the basic steps to take when confronted with a natural monopoly is to isolate it, both to keep it from using its monopoly power to distort other markets and to keep regulators? jobs as clear, simple and limited as possible.
  
  Split them apart! If you provide the line, you should be agnostic as to what travels over it. If you provide an information, communication or entertainment service, you shouldn?t have any control over the lines.

• On the post: FCC's Tom Wheeler Says He'll Ask For Public Comment On Whether It's Appropriate To Reclassify Broadband

  

  Coises ( profile ), 10 May, 2014 @ 01:34pm

  Re: FCC complaints

  http://www.fcc.gov/page/fcc-establishes-new-inbox-open-internet-comments

• On the post: Senate Approves Online Shopping Sales Tax Bill

  

  Coises ( profile ), 07 May, 2013 @ 10:55am

  Re: Re: Why buyers? jurisdiction and not sellers??

  Ah. Of course. It?s obvious once you see it.
  Thanks.
  
  Considering that point, I have to admit that this does make sense (granting the notion that sales taxes make sense at all, which is a whole other can of worms). It?s still depressing to see that government can only seem to deal with anything, ever, by making things more complicated and increasing the visible footprint of the machinery of control.

• On the post: Senate Approves Online Shopping Sales Tax Bill

  

  Coises ( profile ), 06 May, 2013 @ 11:04pm

  Why buyers? jurisdiction and not sellers??

  Can someone explain to me the logic of basing sales tax on where the buyer is located, rather than on where the seller is located? It seems like going by the buyer?s location makes everything much more complex, since it?s the sellers who have to implement tax collection. Why should they be subject to the regulations of places where they are not located?
  
  What is so important about buyers? locations as opposed to sellers? that makes all the added complication worthwhile?

• On the post: Ticketmaster Finally Dropping Captcha System…For Ad-Driven Captcha Clone

  

  Coises ( profile ), 01 Feb, 2013 @ 06:42pm

  ?It remains to see how many advertisers want to be associated with a system not all that different from one almost universally hated.?

  Aren?t all advertisers associated with a system almost universally hated... advertising?

• On the post: Blowback From Publication Of Gun Owner Data Continues — Threats, Lawsuits And Rejected FOIA Requests

  

  Coises ( profile ), 03 Jan, 2013 @ 05:30pm

  Congratulations!

  Congratulations, Lower Hudson Valley Journal News!
  
  You just staged a clear demonstration of why some people (e.g., the state of Arizona) believe there should be no registration requirement to own or carry a gun.

• On the post: Why Do So Many People Rely On Facebook For Communications, Given Its Arbitrary Removal Process?

  

  Coises ( profile ), 02 Nov, 2012 @ 11:22pm

  Because most of us are not consistently interesting

  ?Why do so many people rely on closed platforms today, that allow somewhat arbitrary removal of speech??
  
  I can post nearly anything that isn?t illegal or hardcore porn on my personal web site... but no one will see it.
  
  I could start a blog... there might be two people who even know what RSS is that would add me to their readers.
  
  Most of us don?t generate enough consistently interesting content to hold an audience by ourselves. Facebook is like an open mike night or a community talent show?it aggregates the small amount of interest each of us could generate alone into something that can maintain attention.
  
  Facebook has captured its arena so thoroughly that Diaspora and Friendica and the like have little chance. The successor of Facebook will be something that obsoletes what it does; doing what Facebook does better (more openly, more securely, whatever) will never overcome its head start in user base. At this point, they can (and do) dick us around quite a bit without having to worry much about fallout.
  
  Anything that?s important to me goes on my web site. My biggest complaint about Facebook is that I can?t really integrate the content and presentation I control into the feed they deliver to others... but I can see how Facebook has no incentive to make that possible, and good reasons to throw up roadblocks for anyone who isn?t a paying sponsor or partner.

• On the post: Brazilian Newspapers Apparently Don't Want Traffic; They All Opt Out Of Google News

  

  Coises ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 02:00pm

  The problem with free samples

  Instead, they claim that "by providing the first few lines of our stories to Internet users, the service reduces the chances that they will look at the entire story in our web sites." I'm wondering how they determine this, because I can't see how that would possibly be true.

  They?re just saying that they figure the odds of an Internet user randomly happening to click on a link to their site are greater than the slim chance that anyone will click once he or she has seen a sample of what?s actually there.

Next >>