Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the secrets-revealed dept

This week, all eyes were on the torture report and the government’s response to it. After Dick Cheney attempted to dismiss it with some empty rhetoric, DaveK won first place for insightful by elegantly correcting him:

Cheney is asking the wrong question:

“How nice do you want to be to the murderers of 3,000 Americans?”

The correct question is “How alike do you want to be to the murderers of 3,000 Americans?”

Torture, while the most severe, wasn’t the only exposed misdeed under scrutiny this week. We also saw leaked MPAA emails detailing plans to pay government officials to attack Google, who they called “Goliath”. This led to a thread about the meaning of that codename, in which Mason Wheeler was the clear champion, winning second place for insightful:

Historically, there was something of a rock-paper-scissors dynamic on ancient battlefields. There were three fundamental classes of warriors: cavalry, infantry, and archers.

Cavalry beat archers, with their ability to close quickly and overrun them before they could get many shots off.

Infantry beat cavalry, because they could use long spears to disrupt the heck out of a cavalry charge and panic the horses, throwing the whole group into disarray.

Archers beat infantry, because, infantry being much slower to move than cavalry (especially if they wore heavy armor) they were left exposed to devastating projectile volleys for a long time.

In the ancient tale of David and Goliath, we see the biggest, toughest guy around challenging the opposing army to a traditional rite of combat by champion: a “proxy battle” that avoided the wasteful slaughter of an actual battle. The record goes into great detail about his size and the size and weight of his weapons and armor. There’s no doubt about it: Goliath was heavy infantry through and through.

After much consternation on the other side, a self-selected champion stepped up. When the king tried to outfit him as a heavy infantryman to match Goliath, though, he demurred; it wasn’t what he was trained for. No, David was an archer, and he intended to fight as an archer. He used a sling rather than a bow and arrow, but that’s still an incredibly lethal ranged weapon.

He stepped out onto the field, and Goliath’s fate was sealed at that moment. People who don’t understand the tactics involved call it a surprising victory on David’s part, but in reality the only surprise here is that at no point did Goliath seem to understand just how screwed he was, until it was suddenly too late.

There is one aspect of his description that doesn’t fit the heavy infantry profile: he had a shield bearer go before him. But a guy used to fighting in close quarters doesn’t need someone else to carry his shield; shield bearers were for archers! Between that, his physical description, and the fact that he claimed David was attacking him with “staves” (plural), when he was carrying a single staff, it’s likely that he had severe problems with his vision–which is a known side effect of gigantism–and the “shield bearer” was actually a guide.

Goliath died because he faced an opponent who was playing by different rules than what he was expecting, and he was too blind to notice until it was too late. Now who does that sound more like? Google, or the MPAA?

For editor’s choice, we start with a short comment from Violynne suggesting an even better solution for Keurig’s “coffee DRM” than the scotch-tape circumvention:

Ingenious, but I’m sticking with my way to circumvent the DRM: Not buy the damn product in the first place.

Next, we’ll loop back around to the post about Cheney’s comments and that same question about “how nice” we want to be, where Rich Kulawiec offered up a beautiful statement of principles in response:

I want to be as “nice” to them as the law, international treaties, and centuries of American principles demand that I be. I want to treat them humanely. I want to see that if they are accused of crimes, they are told of those accusations. I want to see if they are tried, that such trial is held in a timely manner and that they are provided with competent legal counsel and thus a robust defense. I want them to be able to confront their accusers via cross-examination and to be able to present witnesses in their favor. I want them to be fully accorded their rights under the Geneva Conventions and under international law and under American law at all times.

Because that’s how it’s done. That’s how civilized nations behave. That’s how proud, strong nations that aren’t afraid of a few trifling “terrorists” act. That’s how countries who refuse to be cowed by a mere pinprick of an attack (which is all that 9/11 was) respond. They do not throw their principles out the window in panic and they do not whimper like frightened children at the threats of bullies.

This isn’t a matter of being “nice” to them or not — although I’m sure war criminal Dick Cheney likes phrasing it that way. It’s a matter of principle, pride and patriotism. It’s a matter of truly being American, not in the flag-waving anthem-singing sense, but in the sense envisioned by those who founded this country.

Not so long ago, the United States and allies tried and executed people for doing exactly what Dick Cheney did. Not so long ago, the United States decried renderings and mock trials and extrajudicial executions and mass surveillance and political persecution and torture and all the other things that we said the Germans did, the Japanese did, the Russians did, the Chinese did. Not so long ago, the United States said that it was important to defeat those countries — either militarily or politically — to stop those things from happening. And now we’ve done them all, thanks to men like Dick Cheney: weak, frightened, lying, sadistic and cowardly men in positions of power.

History will not look kindly on them.

Over on the funny side, we start out with Google News shutting down in Spain in response to the country’s ridiculous copyright law. Dave Cortright won funniest comment of the week with his response:

Spain? Never heard of it. Is that T-pain’s son?

I’d love to hear how the people and politicians in Spain react to this news, but that’s not going to happen since my primary source is Google News.

For second place, we’ve got a comment from our post about record labels releasing flimsy collections of old recordings just for copyright extension purposes, where Michael noted something familiar:

Based on the Aereo case, I’m pretty sure that circumventing the law by following it to the letter means that these guys are a duck or something.

Our first editor’s choice for funny is nice and simple: after yet another story of theft by the TSA, ChurchHatesTucker said all that needs to be said:


They’ll Steal Anything

Last but not least, we’ve actually got a team effort of two comments, back on the post about Google News in Spain. There’s one obvious joke that bubbles up whenever Spain is involved, and one anonymous coward gets props for making it

Nobody expects the Spanish news tax

…but Crusty the Ex-clown gets double props for perfecting it:


No one expects the Spanish Requisition!!!

That’s all for this week, folks!

Rate this comment as insightful
Rate this comment as funny
You have rated this comment as insightful
You have rated this comment as funny
Flag this comment as abusive/trolling/spam
You have flagged this comment
The first word has already been claimed
The last word has already been claimed
Insightful Lightbulb icon Funny Laughing icon Abusive/trolling/spam Flag icon Insightful badge Lightbulb icon Funny badge Laughing icon Comments icon

Comments on “Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt”

Subscribe: RSS Leave a comment
Anonymous Coward says:

‘Rich Kulawiec’

what an excellent comment! not read anywhere else that put things so right and so proper!
i always find it rather strange when countries condemn others for what they do, how they treat their citizens, how they remove and forbid even basic human rights of freedom and privacy. then along comes someone like Cheney, who like most politicians are really has-beens because they have grown old in different times and not adapted. that’s why they find it so easy to be encouraged by industries that are equally as old and run by has-beens, rather than be up to date with all things, including business models but to then try to stop change simply because they cant handle it, cant keep up and are worried about being dumped, they use their last bits of power before they become a part of that awful past to try to screw up the future by being the same as those they have relentlessly condemned!!

Anonymous Coward says:

That’s the tragedy of the post-9/11 world. Yes, 9/11 was horrific, but it also revealed something horrific about the people who were either in power or used it to come to power.

It revealed that at the drop of two buildings and statistically aberrant deaths caused by terrorists, they’re inclined to throw all the rules out the window “because he hit me first,” or at least that’s the excuse.

They’ve created a new arms race, except the proliferation isn’t of dreadnoughts or nuclear weapons – it’s of lower and lower levels of inhuman atrocities. This is a race to the bottom of the darkest depths of immorality. And it’s blindly cheered on by people who speak about love and kindness at the church of their choice on Sundays.

That One Guy (profile) says:


Shenanigans I say! Since it was somehow passed up, as a Reader’s Choice I submit the following comment, submitted by an AC on monday’s ‘Rogers, Hayden Claim Release Of CIA Torture Report Will Be The Tipping Point For Enemies Of The US’ article.

Applying this logic to criminal cases…

[ In chambers, without the jury present. ]
Defence lawyer: “Your Honour, I move to suppress all evidence the prosecutor intends to offer in this case.”
Judge: “Was the evidence obtained unlawfully?”
Defence: “No, your honour.”
Judge: “Is the evidence irrelevant to the case?”
Defence: “No, your honour.”
Judge: “Is the evidence fabricated or in any way misleading?”
Defence: “No, your honour.”
Judge: “Then why should it be suppressed?”
Defence: “It would give the jury the impression my client is guilty, your honour.”
Judge: “You want me to suppress truthful and accurate evidence that your client is guilty, because it would lead the jury to believe that your client is guilty?”
Defence: “Yes, your honour. My client is absolutely guilty of all charges filed, and is concerned that disclosing detailed evidence of his guilt may lead the jury to see him in an unfavourable light.”


Anonymous Coward says:

This is having a good bit of fall out. Everything from calls for prosecution in world court to the judge demanding that the government prosecutors revise what is under seal to reveal what the prisoners at Guantanamo went through in captivity so it can be reflected in public records.

America has hit a low point and is liable to go lower until all these neo-cons get thrown out of Washington, including the ones not elected but working in government service.

Shill on drugs says:

mike i see u r still taking money from google and being their shill as always. see mike now everyone is going to flag my comment because its the truth and techdirt always censors the truth and then claims they are in support of free speech when they keep engaging in censorship while they keep on making claims without the facts.

Shill on drugs says:

Re: Re: Re:

do you want to know how I know Mike secretly works for google? for my side job, other than being a shill, i m a psycho ^^^^^^ psychic and i have been known to have psycho ^^^^^^ psychic dreams sometimes and while these dreams arr almost never true ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ i dreamt that google secretly pays mike to be their shill. i know it sounds crazy but its the only proof i got. yes i was probably on drugs when i had this crazy dream but it doesnt make it any less valid. my psycho ^^^^^^ psychic dream on drugs is all the proof i got but its enough proof to prove mike is really a google shill.

CharlieBrown says:

Re: Techdirt Censorship?

If Techdirt truly censored comments, they wouldn’t have the option to show highly reported comments that you claim are censored. I actually click show on every hidden comment so when I read the comments I read all the comments no matter how stupid those comments may be. I don’t call that censorship.

David says:

Cheney lambasting the torture report:

There is an easy solution, Mr Cheney, to having a “partisan, politically loaded” report “full of crap” written by people who “did not interview” the CIA staff themselves: publish the Panetta report.

It’s written by CIA members having interviewed the staff in question.

Too bad that it is damning to a degree that the CIA tried hacking the Senate Committee’s computers rather than have it remain accessible to them.

That’s how bad the truth is compared to what the CIA wanted to have the Senate Committee see.

Add Your Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here

Comment Options:

Make this the or (get credits or sign in to see balance) what's this?

What's this?

Techdirt community members with Techdirt Credits can spotlight a comment as either the "First Word" or "Last Word" on a particular comment thread. Credits can be purchased at the Techdirt Insider Shop »

Follow Techdirt

Techdirt Daily Newsletter

Techdirt Deals
Techdirt Insider Discord
The latest chatter on the Techdirt Insider Discord channel...