Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
from the free-speech?-who-needs-it,-amiright? dept
This week, we pointed out the disturbing synergy between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on the subject of encryption, the internet and free speech. Three of our four top-voted comments this week come in response to that post, with first place for insightful going to Eric for an observation that’s difficult to ignore:
Bad people used guns to commit crime…”We CANNOT regulate guns to stop this…”
Bad people used the internet to commit crime…”We MUST regulate free speech/the internet to stop this…”
Our second place winner for insightful comes from our own Tim Geigner aka Dark Helmet in response to one of the most bizarre and ridiculous comments on that post, accusing Bernie Sanders of being “a Democratic Socialist and so was the Nazi party”:
You’re fucking kidding me, right? The Nazis were NOT Democratic Socialists, they were National Socialist, from which they derive the Nazi name and also I hate you for being this stupid. The Nazis were a far right organization, on the other end of the political spectrum from Sanders and Democratic Socialists. Notable Democratic Socialists, other than Sanders, include:
1. Christopher Hitchens
2. Albert Fucking Einstein
3. Bertrand Russell
4. John Dewey
5. David Ben-Gurion
If you’re any indication of the level of intellect of the American voter, however, we’re all fucked and let’s all welcome our winners from the Trump/Carson ticket and enjoy the disaster to come.
Jesus fucking Christ….
For editor’s choice on the insightful side, we’ll start out with a response to another post about Clinton doubling down on her attacks on the internet, where HegemonicDistortion latched on to her description of freedom of speech as a “familiar complaint”:
So freedom of speech (presumably privacy and security, too) is a “complaint,” not a right, and the Constitution is just an obstacle to be circumvented to her.
Next, we’ve got a response to our post about Disney sending DMCA notices over photos of people’s legally bought Star Wars toys. We noted that this simply has to be an illegal abuse of the DMCA, and one anonymous commenter pointed out that even if it is, that doesn’t really matter:
No one will be arrested.
No fine for DMCA abuse will be large enough to not be considered a ‘cost of doing business’.
No prosecutor will put their re-election in jeopardy.
No CEO will be willing to take the market hit that doing battle with Disney will cost.
Any attempt to flood the Interwebs with millions of images at a rate far greater than any bot can issue takedowns, will be met with those takedowns inevitably arriving and ISP’s will dirty their underwear in the process of tripping over each other to implement those takedowns.
Theater goers will be asked if they have been to Walmart recently, and will be denied entrance for yes responses (them told to come back in a few months after all the spoilers have been spoiled).
Man, Disney sure buys good laws.
For first place over on the funny side, we return to the week’s most popular post, were the winner is actually a response to Tim’s comment above. Jupiterkansas was most intrigued by number two on the list of examples:
TIL Einstein’s middle name.
For second place, we move away from the presidential candidates but not from the subject of encryption — this time it’s Rep. Michael McCaul, head of the House Homeland Security Committee, calling for an impossible magical back door. One anonymous commenter pointed out an additional way in which the government’s demands are problematic:
If Silicon Valley were to make a magic backdoor that only opened for the good guys with pure intentions, the government wouldn’t be able to access it anyway, so I’m not sure why they’re pushing for it.
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start with a response to calls from the SEC, DOJ and law enforcement to rewrite email privacy laws in their favour, citing the reluctance of many people to hand their personal information over to the government. JD noticed that by simply removing the word “subpoena” from their statement, it can take on a new meaning:
Minus one word …
In certain instances, the person whose emails are sought will respond to our request. But in other instances, the recipient may have erased emails, tendered only some emails, asserted damaged hardware, or refused to respond ? unsurprisingly, individuals who violate the law are often reluctant to produce to the government evidence of their own misconduct.
But enough about FOIA requests ….
Finally, we head back one more time to our post about Hillary Clinton’s comments about free speech, which were driven largely by a desire to squeeze out ISIS, leading one anonymous commenter to hatch a brilliant plan:
I have the solution, lets put RIAA on the speech!
If we declare all ISIS, terrorists speech to be copyrighted by RIAA they will have it taken down by the days end. Problem solved.
That’s all for this week, folks!