FormerAC 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (162) comment rss

  • On the post: FBI Agents Getting More Power To Spy On People With Less Oversight

    FormerAC ( profile ), 14 Jun, 2011 @ 06:55pm

    The conspiracy theorist in me ...

    The conspiracy theorist in me always cringes when I hear about things like this. Let me clue you in to how he thinks ...

    We know our friendly US government has worked deals to get messages they want implanted in prime time TV shows.
    We know our friendly US government is working very hard to either completely eliminate those pesky Bill of Rights things, or to make it legal for some US spy agency to spy on every single person on the planet.
    We know that on most TV shows, anyone who asks for a lawyer before being interviewed by the cops is absolutely, 100% guilty, just because he has a lawyer.
    We know that our current prime time TV landscape is absolutely flooded with cop dramas (how many CSIs? Law and Orders? NCIS? Criminal Minds? Mentalist? White Collar? In Plain Sight etc etc) do we see every week? Is there any point, on any one of those dramas where someone is NOT painted as guilty when they ask for their lawyer?
    We know that it makes great television for those cops to hack the FBI database of this or that. Or illegally wiretap someone they "know" is guilty. Or slam an ax into a table to intimidate an underage suspect (w/o lawyer of course!) into giving a false confession?

    Is is really that hard to believe that there are people somewhere pulling strings like this? Flood the popular media with the right message while giving the FBI the powers to fight evil that our heroes on TV have?

    I must be crazy to think like that.

    Right?

  • On the post: Rojadirecta Sues US Government, Homeland Security & ICE Over Domain Seizure

    FormerAC ( profile ), 13 Jun, 2011 @ 03:07pm

    Re: Re:

    The domain name was seized because it was property used to commit criminal infringement. It matters not if the owner is the criminal.

    If a kid is dealing drugs out of the back door of your local Walmart, the authorities are justified in seizing the Walmart? The owner is not the criminal, but your reasoning seems to suggest that is irrelevant.

  • On the post: The List Of Sites Challenging Domain Seizures

    FormerAC ( profile ), 13 Jun, 2011 @ 11:31am

    Re:

    Update: I've discussed this with a few folks with knowledge of all this, and they suggest ICE's excuse is hogwash, saying there is only one procedure, and all the sites in question are using it...

    The only ones being vague are ICE and DHS. Actually, they aren't being vague, they are lying. But hey, they are the government, and we've always been at war with EastAsia.

  • On the post: Judge: Not Having The Best Security Not Illegal; Defrauded Company Can't Blame Bank

    FormerAC ( profile ), 09 Jun, 2011 @ 07:03am

    Re: Re: Re: The **bank's** money was stolen, not the customer's money.

    No one has cared about signatures on receipts for a very long time.

    I actually did a test on this a year or two ago. For two months, I signed all my credit card slips/screens with Mickey Mouse, RU Looking, X, WTF or some other ridiculous signature. I made sure it was actually readable, and not just a scribble. Not once was I questioned.

  • On the post: Supreme Court Says It's Still Inducement Even If You Proactively Took Steps To Make Sure You Weren't Infringing

    FormerAC ( profile ), 02 Jun, 2011 @ 06:48pm

    Its rulings like this

    Its rulings like this that make me start to wonder if isn't someone pulling the strings.

    But then I remember that you should never attribute to conspiracies what can adequately be explained by stupidity.

  • On the post: Smartphones Make People Ignore Commercials Way More Than DVRs

    FormerAC ( profile ), 27 May, 2011 @ 07:14am

    Ignoring reality

    If I was designing a TV commercial today, I would design around fast forwarding. My DVR (DirecTV) has a 30 second fast forward skip. But it actually shows the video as it fast forwards. Why wouldn't you design a commercial around this type of setup. Have a persistent logo throughout the whole commercial. This way, even if I fast forward, I still see your logo.

  • On the post: Can We Just Admit That The Idea Of A 'Privacy Policy' Is A Failed Idea?

    FormerAC ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 03:46pm

    Changing privacy policies

    Nothing stops a site/app from changing a privacy policy anytime they want to. Even if they create a nice privacy policy saying they will never share anything, it goes out the window if they start losing money or a new VP comes in who changes it. They write a new policy and start selling everything. oops!

  • On the post: Privacy Is Not Secrecy; Debunking The 'If You've Got Nothing To Hide…' Argument

    FormerAC ( profile ), 26 May, 2011 @ 06:26am

    If you have nothing to hide ...

    If you have nothing to hide ...

    why do you have curtains/blinds on your windows?

  • On the post: The Federal Government's Vindictive Legal Assault On NSA Warrantless Wiretapping Whistleblowers

    FormerAC ( profile ), 17 May, 2011 @ 06:09am

    Re: Response to: Anonymous Coward on May 16th, 2011 @ 4:13pm

    Yeah, Nobel thought the same thing.
    So did Oppenheimer.

    They all underestimate our appetite for killing.

  • On the post: TSA May Let 'Trusted Travelers' Avoid Being Groped

    FormerAC ( profile ), 12 May, 2011 @ 03:00pm

    Starting the poll now ...

    Starting the poll on when the first "trusted traveler" commits a terrorist act...

    Will the airlines begin charging more for flights of all "trusted travelers?" Or for safe routes?

    How long until the first "trusted traveler" gets put on the no fly list? How long before "trusted traveler" sells their status?

  • On the post: Google: Major Labels Got In The Way Of Cool Features In Google Music

    FormerAC ( profile ), 10 May, 2011 @ 12:47pm

    Re: The labels need to embrace technology

    Hear?

    Don't forget that if you heard it in a public place, thats a seperate license. If you were reciting the lyrics to yourself, you are going to need a license for that. What, you were singing too? Well now you owe us performance royalties as well. What, you walked into a coffee house while still singing? Now the coffee house owes us. Since you were singing along, out loud, now everyone in the coffee house owes us.

  • On the post: Appeals Court Effectively Opens The Floodgates For People To Claim Hollywood 'Stole' Their Ideas

    FormerAC ( profile ), 06 May, 2011 @ 01:02pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    The reason you don't do this is because by default no company would ever sign one.

    Why not? It's seems that a company would want the terms spelled out on a written contract as opposed to a fuzzy implied contract.

    I own a movie studio. You want to pitch me an idea for a movie.

    Production has just begun on a movie about vampires who work at gas stations.

    I sign your non-compete/no disclosure contract. We meet and you pitch me a movie about vampires who pump gas.

    What happens to my movie?

    That is why they will never sign a contract like that. If they EVER did ANYTHING that even smelled like your idea, they'd be in court forever.

    You can't have an environment that encourages innovation and new ideas if everyone and everything requires non-compete/no disclosure/secrecy.

  • On the post: Obama Administration Asks Supreme Court To Determine If FCC Can Fine ABC For Showing Charlotte Ross Naked

    FormerAC ( profile ), 22 Apr, 2011 @ 02:21pm

    Hope and Change?

    Whoring for RIAA/MPAA.
    Bail outs.
    Censorship.
    Record deficits.

    Hate to quote her, but how's that hopey changey stuff workin out for ya?

  • On the post: Hospitals Argue That More Transparency On Medical Errors Will Decrease Dialogue On Fixing Them

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 09:04pm

    Re:

    So basically, don't hate the player, hate the game?

  • On the post: Hospitals Argue That More Transparency On Medical Errors Will Decrease Dialogue On Fixing Them

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 08:59pm

    The Real Issue

    "most of the Danish hospital managers who were present felt that one should be cautious in opening the door to more information that exposes the hospital's deficiencies."

    I translate this as "I know we suck, just don't tell anyone. How do you expect us to make any money if you let people know how many people we infected/killed/performed the wrong procedure on?

  • On the post: Hospitals Argue That More Transparency On Medical Errors Will Decrease Dialogue On Fixing Them

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 08:49pm

    If a doctor I was seeing believed that "subjecting hospitals and doctors to greater scrutiny would prevent open dialogue about problems and how to fix them because "they must have a very open and frank discussion?, I would seriously doubt his/her critical thinking abilities. If they really believed that hiding or obscuring relevant information/data is beneficial, in any way, I would not trust them to be able to diagnose anything.

  • On the post: Announcing: Freetard 2: Free Harder

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 07:56pm

    LOL .... thank you, made my day. I was laughing so hard I fell out of my chair and hit my head. Who do I send the bills to?

  • On the post: Michigan State Police Say It'll Cost $545k To Discover What Info It's Copying Off Mobile Phones During Traffic Stops [Updated]

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 01:19pm

    Complete GPS history?

    Would the data they download/copy/steal include the complete GPS history of the phone? It appears Apple iPhones store a complete GPS record of every cell phone tower they have ever contacted, and every wifi connection they have seen.

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/04/20/135570632/researchers-apples-iphone-keeps-track-of-every-little-place-you-go

  • On the post: Happy Days Cast Not So Happy: Suing CBS & Paramount For Missing Royalties

    FormerAC ( profile ), 20 Apr, 2011 @ 10:37am

    Re:

    Of course it's still ludicrous that bit part players in an ancient tv series should think that anything using the name of the show they were once in should entitle them to payments

    What if the slot machine uses their images?
    You are assuming the machine just said "Happy Days." A quick google search (http://tinyurl.com/3r3cm87) brings up a picture of the machines themselves (http://southerngaming.com/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/pg56_a-copy_compressed.jpg)

    Looks like it is not only using the name Happy Days, but also images of Richie, Ralph, Potsie and the Fonz. Not having played the machine, I can't say what other elements of the show are used during play.

    While I agree that its ridiculous that a show from the 70s is IP that needs to be protected, that isn't the issue here. It is extremely hypocritical of them to not pay the people whose images they are licensing for profit.

  • On the post: Judge In Google WiFiSpy Case Trying To Determine If Packet Sniffing Open Networks Is An Illegal Wiretap

    FormerAC ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2011 @ 08:20am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Because sb. could put a cable that runs parallel to your internet line and use electromagnetic interference to read all that goes through it.

    sb. ??????

    People seem to be having trouble with this simple concept. Unencrypted WIFI is BROADCAST TO THE WORLD with no protection. Granted, early Wifi routers did not enable encryption by default, but it is available. All you have to do is RTFM.

    Modern Wifi routers have encryption turned on by default. All the major players (at least where I live) have routers that are encrypted OUT OF THE BOX.

    What you are talking about is using specialized equipment to read a signal that is not being broadcast. My internet traffic is run through a cable from my house to my provider. It is point to point traffic, intended for two parties, me and my provider. Unencryped wifi being broadcast and can be read by anyone who cares to receive the signal.

    Lets try this definition of broadcast: circulate: cause to become widely known

    Does that make it any clearer for you? Unencrypted wifi is broadcast ... to everyone.


    Would you feel it's fine if I convinced you I do it to you?

    So you're the one. I knew it!

Next >>