My first thought was of the poor starving artists, and how all that money would (of course, by the logic of the copyright maximalists) result in a veritable explosion of creativity, art and music.
Which things are almost impossible to find now, in this artist-depriving, pirate-riddled world.
lol. I thought the same thing but I've been conditioned by example after example to just assume my poor thought processes and pathetic analytical tools (logic, reason, empirical testing) were inadequate to understand the absolute legal necessity of otherwise completely opaque statements. (never mind that the legalisms creating said necessity are often as batshit insane as the response)
Teka, your summary is perfectly analogous to the actual content of the shakedown letter.
What we see here IS THE DIRECT RESULT OF "GOVERNMENTAL OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION", YA MAROON.
Jebus. WHAT, in this story, suggests MORE of would be better?? AT&T flat out refused to correct a well-intended amendment to the "free relay calls for deafies" giveaway, and they were allowed to do so DESPITE your so-desirable "governmental oversight and regulation" because the political actors involved were paid off with campaign support and donations.
Giving the government more of any power only allows them to sell their services off more. The libertarians you so lamely mock in your post would say, "Do away with the giveaway in the first place." Sure, it's only tens or hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars wasted (or should I say "unfairly siphoned into the coffers of an existing Big Corp"?), but add up enough similar frauds and waste and you're talking about generations of Americans paying off the debt from your beloved oversight and regulation.
You're either a)trolling b)stupid c)lying or some combination thereof.
AT&T was NOT being asked to "monitor the content of phone calls" which you then bogusly conflate with ISPs monitoring the content of internet browsing. Nothing remotely similar to what you state, but you then rush off, trailing straw, to make a completely invalid point. Not impressive.
AT&T were simply being asked to confirm that the people trying to use the (very profitable) relay-call system were US-based. Easy to do, but when they were ordered by the gov't to do it, they somehow were unable to figure out how to do it. So the revenue stream of tax dollars continued, and this is no more or less than fraud.
Your lecturing, condescending tone is made even more offensive by the fact that you are, as stated, trolling, stupid or lying. An ugly thought process in there regardless, and I'm guessing the rationalization involves a paycheck amirite?
I am somewhat curious about the fellow who somehow appeared to think this situation demonstrates the need for more "government oversight and regulation". How do you figger that.
Yes, if you accept "a good chance" as a mathematical term equivalent to the chance of a coin landing heads or tails.
Also, though I am an honest-to-God NotRepublican, I still feel obliged to point out that our first half-white president comes out of the very same political culture identified here.
@The Devil's Coachman:
In a budget-reduction move that will cost only $2B, the Department of Redundancy Department has been folded into the Office of Bureaus and Departments (though retaining its name, budget and physical resources, to be housed in the new $5B "Senator Redacted Memorial Office Building Complex Center")
It's not FUD at all, it's reductio ad absurdam, which, while itself a logical fallacy, often has value in forcing a re-examination of the starting assumptions.
Now, use of a logical fallacy does not guarantee a false result. In fact, in this case, the starting assumptions are proven to be pretty accurate, foremost among them "IP owners (not artists) have no guiding principle save greater revenue generation from the 'property'." and "This has nothing to do with art, the common good, or established legal and moral principles." Then you examine the steps they've taken already, extrapolate, go a little farther and see what you get.
And look! The reductio turns out not to be so absurdam after all.
ps) "Ceci n’est pas un box" is a sweet and appropriate reference to Magritte's Surrealist painting "Ceci n’est pas un pipe"
Qwest is an almost perfect exemplar of corporate villany, short-sightedness, customer abuse and generally evile behavior.
I don't have a lot of links, as this is all from personal experience, but they violated Utah law regarding DSL service, specifically engaging in false service outages directed at a medium-size ISP/internet wholesaler I worked for. They further endeared themselves to me by unilaterally switching me from my FREE, work-provided DSL service (maintained and supported by friends and co-workers) to their overpriced shite service.
When my phone bill arrived, with congratulations on my new service, I called, screamed at some poor support guy, made damn clear that I did not want their service, had never ordered their service and, given the circumstances, would have no conceivable reason to order their service.
Month later, came back from a weekend in the mountains to find the service had been switched. Called, screamed, act2, spoke to a supervisor who was so beat down she didn't even offer terms, just accepted my cancellation of land line, DSL, everything related to Qwest. As if it happened a lot.
Oh, and when she checked the notes on my first cancellation call, she claimed all they said was "Explained new service to caller." Nice. That's not ineptitude of support, that's instructing your support personnel to participate in a fucking policy of fraud. No wonder he sounded a little weird.
There's a lot more, SLAMming, SLAPPing, dirty lobbying, pretty much the whole role call of bad corporate practice.
Good luck, anybody involved in any way with these fucks.
Meh. What would have been a more accurate formulation would be: "Welcome to totalitarianism."
The economic or social justification behind totalitarian government is irrelevant. Infringement on individual freedom "for the good of society" is found, with differing justifications, on both sides of the largely-useless left/right dichotomy.
But as long as "they" can keep us slinging such "I know what it means when I use it!" terms as treehugger, teabagger, anti-American, bible-thumper, socialist, communist, racist, etc, etc at each other the slow gathering-in of all power to a central elite will continue.
And trust me, "they" aren't all oilmen or hollywood stars, or pointy-head academic proponents of the various -isms or cynical manipulators of clueless religious fundamentalists.
The problem is systemic. There is a major benefit to ruining these people's lives for some few (prosecutors, lawmakers, campaigners to end child sexual abuse) and not enough benefit to the many who see what a bad thing it has become for them (us, I guess) to do anything about it.
Same with marijuana laws. Same with imminent domain. Same with public employee pensions. Same with IP and patent policy.
The forces driving bad law and bad policy, in case after case move things to a worse and less logical and less just place and leave people fuming about the "liberal media" and "hate radio" and ranting about the bad people on the other side of the bogus divisions we've been presented with.
"Welcome to socialism.", my ass. I wish it was that simple.
Maybe you should register as "Simplistic Argument Guy", AC.
Let's see...not having a million dollars is detrimental to people's health, as is the related "deadly" risk of driving old cars in imperfect condition, as is the potentially deadly risk of heart and mental problems caused by the stress of not having enough money to make the mortgage payment and other financial obligations.
So are you really saying that because the world is not perfect for all people...ripping them off for the emergency service their taxes already subsidize is OK??? Really?
Of course you're not. You're making an entirely different, and mostly unrelated, stupid argument.
I'm surprised you didn't work in a zinger directed at Bush there...
I suppose Wolfgang Werle and his half-brother Manfred Lauber who murdered Bavarian actor Walter Sedlmayr will also want expunged from the internet all mention of their complicity in the events of 9/11? (And the Moon Landing Hoax.)
Ummm...maybe they should look at revenues generated by, say, SELLING HOUSES as opposed to the ad revenue generated by the site.
They might find the latter benefit the people who administer their website, while the former benefits the people ON WHOSE BEHALF THE WEBSITE WAS SET UP.
Not a conflict of interest exactly...more of a failure of communication and prioritization.
Let's not be too hard on our British cousins regarding an "appalling lack of suspicion" of their government.
After all, a few sweet words was all that was necessary to persuade the freedom-loving individualists of this country that if an Illinois/Cook County politician is corrupt it doesn't mean the next is a liar. And if the next is a liar, it doesn't mean the NEXT is a liar. And if the third IS a liar (and so on through 999)...it doesn't mean the thousandth (Obama) is a regular say-anything-to-get-elected, do-anything-to-stay-in-power politician.
I'm not saying Obama is better or worse than any other politico, but the gullibility of his supporters surely rivals anything we've see in England.
"Journalists every day are faced with the choice of laboriously checking the validity of what they are told or just putting it in the paper. Both approaches pay the same."
~More or less accurate Scott Adams quote
Also, good points above about the incestuous "sourcing" practices of the MSM. Not surprising from media that can't or doesn't bother to differentiate between advocacy group press releases and scientific stuides.
(untitled comment)
My first thought was of the poor starving artists, and how all that money would (of course, by the logic of the copyright maximalists) result in a veritable explosion of creativity, art and music.
Which things are almost impossible to find now, in this artist-depriving, pirate-riddled world.
Re: Re: Re:
Scrooge McDuck actually had "money SILOS".
You think those things are filled with cowfodder?
Re:
lol. I thought the same thing but I've been conditioned by example after example to just assume my poor thought processes and pathetic analytical tools (logic, reason, empirical testing) were inadequate to understand the absolute legal necessity of otherwise completely opaque statements. (never mind that the legalisms creating said necessity are often as batshit insane as the response)
Teka, your summary is perfectly analogous to the actual content of the shakedown letter.
Re:
What we see here IS THE DIRECT RESULT OF "GOVERNMENTAL OVERSIGHT AND REGULATION", YA MAROON.
Jebus. WHAT, in this story, suggests MORE of would be better?? AT&T flat out refused to correct a well-intended amendment to the "free relay calls for deafies" giveaway, and they were allowed to do so DESPITE your so-desirable "governmental oversight and regulation" because the political actors involved were paid off with campaign support and donations.
Giving the government more of any power only allows them to sell their services off more. The libertarians you so lamely mock in your post would say, "Do away with the giveaway in the first place." Sure, it's only tens or hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars wasted (or should I say "unfairly siphoned into the coffers of an existing Big Corp"?), but add up enough similar frauds and waste and you're talking about generations of Americans paying off the debt from your beloved oversight and regulation.
Re: Re: Re:
The logical faculty weak in this one is.
You're either a)trolling b)stupid c)lying or some combination thereof.
AT&T was NOT being asked to "monitor the content of phone calls" which you then bogusly conflate with ISPs monitoring the content of internet browsing. Nothing remotely similar to what you state, but you then rush off, trailing straw, to make a completely invalid point. Not impressive.
AT&T were simply being asked to confirm that the people trying to use the (very profitable) relay-call system were US-based. Easy to do, but when they were ordered by the gov't to do it, they somehow were unable to figure out how to do it. So the revenue stream of tax dollars continued, and this is no more or less than fraud.
Your lecturing, condescending tone is made even more offensive by the fact that you are, as stated, trolling, stupid or lying. An ugly thought process in there regardless, and I'm guessing the rationalization involves a paycheck amirite?
Re: Re: Re: TrollHard 2: Virgin Lust
*polite golf claps furiously*
Sorry, the tags kinda showed through there.
I am somewhat curious about the fellow who somehow appeared to think this situation demonstrates the need for more "government oversight and regulation". How do you figger that.
Re: Ah yes...
Yes, if you accept "a good chance" as a mathematical term equivalent to the chance of a coin landing heads or tails.
Also, though I am an honest-to-God NotRepublican, I still feel obliged to point out that our first half-white president comes out of the very same political culture identified here.
Just. Sayin'.
(untitled comment)
@The Devil's Coachman:
In a budget-reduction move that will cost only $2B, the Department of Redundancy Department has been folded into the Office of Bureaus and Departments (though retaining its name, budget and physical resources, to be housed in the new $5B "Senator Redacted Memorial Office Building Complex Center")
(untitled comment)
It's not FUD at all, it's reductio ad absurdam, which, while itself a logical fallacy, often has value in forcing a re-examination of the starting assumptions.
Now, use of a logical fallacy does not guarantee a false result. In fact, in this case, the starting assumptions are proven to be pretty accurate, foremost among them "IP owners (not artists) have no guiding principle save greater revenue generation from the 'property'." and "This has nothing to do with art, the common good, or established legal and moral principles." Then you examine the steps they've taken already, extrapolate, go a little farther and see what you get.
And look! The reductio turns out not to be so absurdam after all.
ps) "Ceci n’est pas un box" is a sweet and appropriate reference to Magritte's Surrealist painting "Ceci n’est pas un pipe"
I'm pretty sure the problem...
...will be compounded if they approve my new iSuckle app.
Oh, it's worse than that...
Qwest is an almost perfect exemplar of corporate villany, short-sightedness, customer abuse and generally evile behavior.
I don't have a lot of links, as this is all from personal experience, but they violated Utah law regarding DSL service, specifically engaging in false service outages directed at a medium-size ISP/internet wholesaler I worked for. They further endeared themselves to me by unilaterally switching me from my FREE, work-provided DSL service (maintained and supported by friends and co-workers) to their overpriced shite service.
When my phone bill arrived, with congratulations on my new service, I called, screamed at some poor support guy, made damn clear that I did not want their service, had never ordered their service and, given the circumstances, would have no conceivable reason to order their service.
Month later, came back from a weekend in the mountains to find the service had been switched. Called, screamed, act2, spoke to a supervisor who was so beat down she didn't even offer terms, just accepted my cancellation of land line, DSL, everything related to Qwest. As if it happened a lot.
Oh, and when she checked the notes on my first cancellation call, she claimed all they said was "Explained new service to caller." Nice. That's not ineptitude of support, that's instructing your support personnel to participate in a fucking policy of fraud. No wonder he sounded a little weird.
There's a lot more, SLAMming, SLAPPing, dirty lobbying, pretty much the whole role call of bad corporate practice.
Good luck, anybody involved in any way with these fucks.
(untitled comment)
Meh. What would have been a more accurate formulation would be: "Welcome to totalitarianism."
The economic or social justification behind totalitarian government is irrelevant. Infringement on individual freedom "for the good of society" is found, with differing justifications, on both sides of the largely-useless left/right dichotomy.
But as long as "they" can keep us slinging such "I know what it means when I use it!" terms as treehugger, teabagger, anti-American, bible-thumper, socialist, communist, racist, etc, etc at each other the slow gathering-in of all power to a central elite will continue.
And trust me, "they" aren't all oilmen or hollywood stars, or pointy-head academic proponents of the various -isms or cynical manipulators of clueless religious fundamentalists.
The problem is systemic. There is a major benefit to ruining these people's lives for some few (prosecutors, lawmakers, campaigners to end child sexual abuse) and not enough benefit to the many who see what a bad thing it has become for them (us, I guess) to do anything about it.
Same with marijuana laws. Same with imminent domain. Same with public employee pensions. Same with IP and patent policy.
The forces driving bad law and bad policy, in case after case move things to a worse and less logical and less just place and leave people fuming about the "liberal media" and "hate radio" and ranting about the bad people on the other side of the bogus divisions we've been presented with.
"Welcome to socialism.", my ass. I wish it was that simple.
Re: Re: Re: Paying extra? A possible exception.
Maybe you should register as "Simplistic Argument Guy", AC.
Let's see...not having a million dollars is detrimental to people's health, as is the related "deadly" risk of driving old cars in imperfect condition, as is the potentially deadly risk of heart and mental problems caused by the stress of not having enough money to make the mortgage payment and other financial obligations.
So are you really saying that because the world is not perfect for all people...ripping them off for the emergency service their taxes already subsidize is OK??? Really?
Of course you're not. You're making an entirely different, and mostly unrelated, stupid argument.
I'm surprised you didn't work in a zinger directed at Bush there...
Re: Re: Okay
Yes, but they're suing so that you won't mention it.
More unmentionables...
I suppose Wolfgang Werle and his half-brother Manfred Lauber who murdered Bavarian actor Walter Sedlmayr will also want expunged from the internet all mention of their complicity in the events of 9/11? (And the Moon Landing Hoax.)
(untitled comment)
@Casey:
Ummm...maybe they should look at revenues generated by, say, SELLING HOUSES as opposed to the ad revenue generated by the site.
They might find the latter benefit the people who administer their website, while the former benefits the people ON WHOSE BEHALF THE WEBSITE WAS SET UP.
Not a conflict of interest exactly...more of a failure of communication and prioritization.
(untitled comment)
Let's not be too hard on our British cousins regarding an "appalling lack of suspicion" of their government.
After all, a few sweet words was all that was necessary to persuade the freedom-loving individualists of this country that if an Illinois/Cook County politician is corrupt it doesn't mean the next is a liar. And if the next is a liar, it doesn't mean the NEXT is a liar. And if the third IS a liar (and so on through 999)...it doesn't mean the thousandth (Obama) is a regular say-anything-to-get-elected, do-anything-to-stay-in-power politician.
I'm not saying Obama is better or worse than any other politico, but the gullibility of his supporters surely rivals anything we've see in England.
(untitled comment)
"Journalists every day are faced with the choice of laboriously checking the validity of what they are told or just putting it in the paper. Both approaches pay the same."
~More or less accurate Scott Adams quote
Also, good points above about the incestuous "sourcing" practices of the MSM. Not surprising from media that can't or doesn't bother to differentiate between advocacy group press releases and scientific stuides.