Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the slow-and-steady dept
The voting was somewhat slow this week, especially on the funny side, but that’s no reason to ignore the great comments that rose to the top. After we noted that, despite the positive trend of increased exposure of police abuse, there doesn’t seem to be any decrease in the abuse itself, That One Guy won first place on the insightful side by exploring the big reason for that:
They remain ‘oblivious’ to it for the simple reason that it doesn’t matter. Sure they got recorded macing someone for talking back, or beating someone, or robbing someone. What happens when that recording goes public?
They aren’t fired, they aren’t shifted to a desk-job to account for their inability to act like an adult around other people, any ‘investigation’ inevitably clears them, and if that doesn’t work their union will almost always fight to get their job back, no matter what they were charged with.
They don’t care because even when people record their abuses of authority and criminal actions, they are never held accountable for them.
Once they see their own paychecks docked, their own pensions reduced to pay out settlement funds…
Once they start getting fired or demoted for their actions…
Once they are held accountable and charged with the crimes they commit under the ‘authority’ of their badge…
Only then then will care, but not a second before.
Meanwhile, federal law enforcement has apparently been scrutinizing its applicants’ downloading habits in recorded job interviews. This spurred Michael to win second place for insightful with a simple question:
So they can record interviews, but they are unreliable for interrogations?
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we start with the shortest and simplest of many responses to the ludicrous notion that questioning the government’s claims about Kim Dotcom, while giving Dotcom the benefit of the doubt in his statements, shows a “pro-piracy bias”. RD said what everyone with a basic sense of justice was thinking:
Taking everything Dotcom argues at face value, while being skeptical of everything the government argues, shows a *pro due process* bias.
This week, we also criticized (with some reluctance, and a great hope that he’ll rethink his opinion) Neil deGrasse Tyson for some of his views on technology, startups and innovation. Hij expanded on our point, noting that Tyson’s comments display exactly the kind of shortsightedness that scientists so often face:
What I find sad about this is that there is no shortage of people who look at what physicists and mathematicians do and use this same argument. I can easily go to the local uni, pick out a random physicist and make fun of his work saying it has no bearing on the things that matter to me.
Dr. Tyson has been tireless in trying to combat this argument, and now here he is using it on someone else. He should be celebrating everybody who creates new ideas no matter how small or shallow. The problems start when we start pointing at “the other” and denigrating their work.
Dr. Tyson of all people show understand this.
With that, we head over to the funny side, where are top two comments are neck-in-neck, separated by only a single vote. In first place we’ve got beech, with his proposed reason for USTR secrecy surrounding the TPP agreement:
Uhh, is it because if the terrorists find out we’ll all be dead? That seems to be the usual reason.
Just barely in second place we’ve got ChurchHatesTucker, who balked at how relaxed we were about the release of Keith Alexander’s financial disclosure documents:
Oh, sure. Today it’s Alexander’s self serving investments, but tomorrow it’ll be the US’ nucular launch codes. And then where will you be, hippy?
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start with a comment about Aereo — or rather, about the judge who asked them “just as a matter of finality, how many bites at the apple does one get?”. One anonymous commenter seemed just as confused by this question as we were, and attempted to clarify:
Judge, are you saying that you only take one bite of an apple and throw the rest out?
That seems like a huge waste of apples.
And finally, we’ve got a comment that I enjoyed primarily because I’m always happy to know that people are aware of how broken the premise of Lucy is. After we took a look at ways of harnessing energy from the sun in one of our DailyDirt posts, Zonker was inspired:
For some reason this makes me think of taking the (flawed) concept of the recent movie “Lucy” and applying it to the plant kingdom: what happens when plants achieve 100% energy capture from sunlight?
Come on Hollywood, let’s make this happen.
…Actually, I think they pretty much did: