Gabriel Tane's Favorites Of The Week: Censorship At Home And Abroad

from the favorites-of-the-week dept

This week's list of "favorite" posts of the week is handed off to Gabriel Tane

Friends! Countrymen! Techdirt-ians! Lend me your... eyes! It's my turn to stroke my ego and pretend that anyone cares to hear what I have to say about issues. But, if you're still reading (and keep on reading), then I'll assume you're at least interested. So, read on and thanks for your attention.

First up, we'll start with a whole slew of related articles that show how the DHS/ICE domain seizures have some serious questions that need some answers. This week, we've seen stories that discuss what does the situation mean to our international relations. The question of jurisdiction has been batted around in the comments as a matter of technicality, but not a lot was said about how far-reaching of an effect this may have if other countries decide they don't like how we seem to be rather bully-ish about how our laws are more important than others'. I don't know the answer to that question, but since our actions so far have been to pull our plug out and thumb our noses, I don't think I want to know the effect.

Further, we've seen where the technical understanding and legality have been called into question by more than just bloggers and interested lawyers. Now, have the questions been raised in such a way that will force the hand of DHS/ICE? Probably not; but the fact that so many people are raising their eyebrows about it means there is something going on that needs to be looked at. And it will, sooner than later I hope.

Second, I also got quite interested in the patent-vs-innovation article that was posted. It seems that the status-quo is being questioned even by those "inside" the system. In a very broad way, I wonder how long until actual common sense is going to win over the juggernaut of established bureaucracy. Hmm...

Third, I was very interested to hear about the situation in Egypt. Actually, I heard about it here first. I didn't follow it completely and thoroughly, but I did have a face-palm moment at this story about the timing of American legislation that people said included an "internet kill switch." I was worried about someone posting comments from a tin-foil fort about how Egypt was some kind of warning about what would happen if the US increased its censorship... and here comes the government showing how such a claim wouldn't be too far of a stretch. sigh. At least China was worried about the implications.

Further on the face-palm front... I was glad to see the TSA getting a clue with new scanners that don't show you naked, and realizing the people who write the paychecks are not happy with their actions -- and not surprised to see them completely ignore the need for effective screening that actually does something other than justify a paycheck.

Fourth and finally, ain't technology grand!? Seeing Bryant Gumbel and Katie Couric discover the internet was fun. Now, much like the rest of you, I found this to be an amusing view on how technology has grown and how silly we see ourselves then, 20+ years later. I was, again like most of you, sadly not surprised when a major news corp followed this up by completely overreacting to the situation, firing the person responsible and, thus, creating the much-loved Streisand-effect. I wonder how long it's going to take before the reality of the internet's openness and, well, immortality sinks in to the people who think they can just wish information away.

There were so many fun stories this week, I know I didn't get them all covered. I think I covered the ones that echo strongest with me: the fact that our government seems to want to censor what's on the internet (arguably, at the beck and call of the entertainment industry) while another country (our ally?) faces some very serious consequences for that very action.

I think we've seen the start of a trend towards people wanting real answers to what's going on. I know that as I read the comments from both sides (at least, those on either side that choose to provide data), I learn more and more about how these things do and should work. For that, I would like to take a purely-selfish moment and thank all the commenters -- regulars, ACs, insiders and outsiders -- for helping me broaden my knowledge about the world around me.

And, of course, I do so love to see how far technology has come in the last few years... and if anyone wants some authentic AOL coasters, let me know ;).


Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

  • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
     
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 12:30pm

    Another kool aid drinker rises to the top.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 1:20pm

      Re:

      That might be because he has a name.

      Also, Kool-Aid is the stuff of legends. Do not diss the Kool-Aid.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    • This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it
       
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 2:37pm

      Re:

      The Fanboy Special served up hot and fresh every Saturday.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Hephaestus (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 2:56pm

        Re: Re:

        If you read the previous post you will notice something. People are grouping together online according to their interests, and what affects them personally. No amount of bullying, being a troll, or being a shill will change that. You see, like minded individuals tend to come together in real life randomly. Search engines and social media changes that dynamic dramatically. They are a force multiplier of ideas. Leading to an acceleration of not only new knowledge but of change in the rela world.

        So I admit, I am a fanboi of a large chunk of what TechDirt publishes. The reason being, IP is one of my interests.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 7:23pm

          Re: Re: Re:

          "I am a fanboi of a large chunk of what TechDirt publishes"

          A large chunk is not everything. What about everything other than the large chunk? Why not really work for "change in the rela world" that moves things closer to you being a fanboi of all of techdirt?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            techflaws.org (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 6:24am

            Good riddance

            And why not let people do as they like and instead of spamming the comments with your bull change the real world?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 7:29am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Work for change... post on Techdirt... You act like these two things are mutually exclusive. You assume that no one here spends any time doing anything outside of reading and writing in these discussions. How omniscient of you.

            This about this for a second... who is going to be more effective at working change? A person who feels something is wrong in the world and says to their reps "Hey, let's stop this! Its bad!". Or a person who discusses the issues with others, gains points of views they never had, finds new facets to research on, and then says to their reps "Hey, let's stop this! Its bad because..."

            Or do you just dislike us here because we believe things differently than you do?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:26am

          Re: Re: Re:

          If you read the previous post you will notice something. People are grouping together online according to their interests, and what affects them personally.

          That is sort of self-defeating at a certain point, especially if you are shouting down anyone who doesn't agree with you. That sort of grouping is similar to the Republican and Democratic parties, with the Tea Party yahoos and the Libertarian Luddites tossed in the middle. At the end of the day, you are picking sides, and surrounding yourself with people who tell you that you are right. That doesn't open your mind, it closes it further.

          I think that sites like Techdirt, which encourage "shouting down the opposition" are a negative, and a dead end for progress.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:11am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            I've observed plenty of shouting down from either 'side'.

            I respect posts that, as Gabriel noted above, give explanations for their shouting (or simple disagreement).

            The "kool-aid drinkers" and "freetards" insults add nothing, much like the "corporate shill" epithets. Really, such things diminish anything else the poster might've said. When you're reduced to insults, it indicates you have no further legitimate argument.

            Things written about and discussed here at TD obviously invoke some heated opinion and often result in more information to chew on. That's what makes the place interesting and worthwhile to me.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:49am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            how does Techdirt encourage "shouting down the opposition"? If you actually read what the regulars say around here, the only time we "shout down" anyone is when people like Anonymous just keep spouting the same tired rhetoric without providing any facts, figures, or support...who are doing so just to promote the very hostility you say you're against.

            So who's shouting down the opposition? Regulars here the calmly and rationally state their cases and provide supporting info, or the 'opposition' who reply with "LOL U R Dumb"?

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:12am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

              e only time we "shout down" anyone is when people like Anonymous just keep spouting the same tired rhetoric without providing any facts, figures, or support.

              What you seem to miss is that from over here, Mike Masnick does the same thing. He is very good at leaving out relevant facts, or sub-setting data, or setting things up in a manner that supports his view and disguises or blocks opposing views.

              When you pick and choose your "facts", or what you build "facts" out of opinions (like the USPTO willy nilly approving patents claim), you don't get to claim the high moral ground.

              What is key here is that you don't move forward if you don't accept that the other side has either some good ideas or some logic in their stands. Some of what is said on TD is very informative and very forward thinking. Some of it is wishful thinking. Where it becomes an issue is when the wishful thinking is treated as a "fact" and things are built up from there. My biggest disagreements with people where are the ones who aren't looking at the basis of many of the stories posted here, and are accepting as fact what is not really proven.

              It is incredibly hard to have a discussion of the facts when the facts themselves are in question.

              So who's shouting down the opposition?

              Anyone ever call you a troll on here, or an idiot? Do people ignore your points and just say "you don't know anything at all"? Rational discussion doesn't start with name calling. There are plenty of children on here that come to pick a fight, not to discuss points. They flame, and they get flamed back.

              At the end of the day, any dissenting views on TD are quickly attacked not on logic, but usually on attacking the person, their writing style, whatever you like. That is the sign of closed minds, and that does nothing to advance your cause.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:49am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                "At the end of the day, any dissenting views on TD are quickly attacked not on logic, but usually on attacking the person, their writing style, whatever you like. That is the sign of closed minds, and that does nothing to advance your cause."

                I find this statement odd, like we're reading totally different websites. Maybe, as a regular reader of several years, I've learned to filter out the namecalling flamewars or something.

                I've seen some really great, informative, and civil discussions here at TD, discussions that have expanded my understanding in both directions.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 11:31am

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                What you seem to miss is that from over here, Mike Masnick does the same thing. He is very good at leaving out relevant facts, or sub-setting data, or setting things up in a manner that supports his view and disguises or blocks opposing views.

                When you pick and choose your "facts", or what you build "facts" out of opinions (like the USPTO willy nilly approving patents claim), you don't get to claim the high moral ground.
                and again, feel free to provide evidence. As far as the USPTO, it's obvious that they are issuing patents which seem to go against the purpose of the patent... as pointed out by others in the arena. If Mike chooses to describe it as "willy nilly", how is that failing on a moral high-ground? It's a choice of vocabulary.


                "It is incredibly hard to have a discussion of the facts when the facts themselves are in question"
                I don't disagree with you. But what I was talking about is that the only people who are 'shouted down' are the ones who disagree with a stance, call those that do "stupid" or "freetards" etc, and don't actually challenge the facts, only point and laugh at the people using the facts.


                "Do people ignore your points and just say "you don't know anything at all"?"
                Yes. One goes by the name Anonymous (not 'anonymous coward'), and the other (on some rare occasions when he's in a bad mood) Average Joe. There's also Darryl, but I haven't seen him around much anymore (vacation maybe). The Anti-Mike seems to still be rolling around under the Anonymous Coward moniker and is notorious for attacking Mike himself and not so much the statements Mike makes.


                "At the end of the day, any dissenting views on TD are quickly attacked not on logic, but usually on attacking the person, their writing style, whatever you like. That is the sign of closed minds, and that does nothing to advance your cause."
                citation or bullshit. I don't usually resort to foul language, but you just included me in that. And it's flat-out wrong

                If you actually read my previous comments, you'd know that logic is one of my big things. If someone comes in with fallacious arguments, yes, I point that out and challenge them to make legitimate arguments. The only one's I've attacked in the past are Anonymous (mainly because he's proven beyond all doubt that he refuses to engage in honest debate) and RJR (for the same reason). I'm all for logical arguments, but when the other side fails to play nice, I'll damned sure call them out on it.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                •  
                  identicon
                  Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 6:24pm

                  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                  citation or bullshit.

                  Mike's own best quote: "Oh, grow up".

                  'nuff said.

                   

                  reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 6:49pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    'nuff said? How about the rest of the quote and the context surrounding it?

                    Sorry, should I have specified that by "context", I meant "the actual information pertaining to the conversation" and not just "a small out-of-context snippet that supports my side"? My bad.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    techflaws.org (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:38pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    How very convinving.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

                  •  
                    icon
                    Any Mouse (profile), Feb 7th, 2011 @ 2:47pm

                    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

                    Thank you for proving the argument put to you so succinctly. You've just resorted to the 'shouting down' that you supposedly dislike so much.

                     

                    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 2:49pm

      Re:

      Are you happy for having company or are you sad because you don't want his company on the top of the kool-aid drinkers?

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 7:51am

      Re:

      well, this early in the AM, it's mostly coffee... kool-aid comes later.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    abc gum, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 1:39pm

    Most people view contribution as being more important than childish remarks, you might try it sometime.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    Hephaestus (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 2:08pm

    Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

    "I think we've seen the start of a trend towards people wanting real answers to what's going on."

    Its is called a true democratic republic and it is evolving as we speak.

    "It's my turn to stroke my ego and pretend that anyone cares to hear what I have to say about issues."

    I don't care, but great post none the less ... ;)

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      identicon
      Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 2:58pm

      Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

      Actually, what you are seeing is the breakdown of structured society, where people think they have the right (and some would suggest) obligation to stick their noses into everything.

      Rather than working to get the right people running the show, they elect idiots through incredibly partisan politics, and then nit-pick at the work of their underlings.

      Where this is heading is paralysis, where nobody in power dares to take a decision for fear of offending some idiot with a keyboard and a free wordpress account.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        abc gum, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 3:34pm

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        Wow, where do you get these silly paranoid delusions?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Hephaestus (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 3:44pm

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        "Actually, what you are seeing is the breakdown of structured society, where people think they have the right (and some would suggest) obligation to stick their noses into everything."

        We do have the right to stick our noses into EVERYTHING the government does. They "represent" us, they do not rule us. That is the difference between a republic and an empire.

        When wrongs and injustices are done we most certainly do have a right, a moral, and a societal obligation, to do the right thing. Most people are apathetic and forget this.

        It all goes back to a quote you may have heard before. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing" Edmund Burke.

        So I say for ever and for all time, we should all stick our noses into the affairs of government, and any person or corporation living off the government dole.

        "Where this is heading is paralysis, where nobody in power dares to take a decision for fear of offending some idiot with a keyboard and a free wordpress account."

        I will quote Thoreau, Jefferson, and-or Paine here, "That government is best which governs least". Allowing individuals or corporations to lobby for, and dictate every aspect of daily life, through purchased laws, is not life. It is slavery, an affront to dignity, and also to liberty.

        Forcing rulers and the ruling class to think their actions through because they are being judged, weighed, and measured at all times is a good thing.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 5:14pm

          Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

          I think it has crossed the line and gone from just being observant to being an annoyance, a hinderance. I think that public officials are so scared to offend anyone, to use a wrong work in a report, literally to move forward that they would rather stand pat.

          The enemy of progress is fear. When you create fear, you slow progress. It's why FUD is the common weapon of choice these days online. By creating fear, your create uncertainty, you create pause. Even when people know they are right, they are stopped by the fear of being wrong. Public officials have it worse, because they know that around every corner is some jackwagon with a cellphone camera ready to take something out of context, so they can get their 15 minutes of youtube fame.

          It's pretty sad.

          "hat government is best which governs least" - that tends to sound like a call to anarchy, the absence of government. Stay out of everything, all the time. It's actually the current hot topic, the thing that the FUD-sters love, like this group:

          http://www.nofoodtaxes.com/

          Watch the commercial. They can't help but say the government needs to stay out of their lives. It's an appeal to fear, "oh no, the govenment is telling us what to do".

          If you fall for it, well, shame on you.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Kaden (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 5:39pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            Your entire premise is based on the assumption that the government has our best interests at heart.

            There is currently no clear evidence that this is the case..

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Hephaestus (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 6:34pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            Just so you know you haven't answered any of my speaking points, just thrown out rhetoric . I will however answer all of yours talking points. And read "the end ..." it's a killer ...

            "I think that public officials are so scared to offend anyone, to use a wrong "work"=(WORD) in a report, literally to move forward that they would rather stand pat."

            Politicians frozen in their tracks and not over reaching is a good thing.

            If you want me to quote historical references where over reaching government causes failure I will give you over 3,000 references. Country's from 2500 years ago, until today, all repeat the same pattern. Build it, regulatory capture and financial sharing, failure.

            "The enemy of progress is fear."

            Agreed

            "Public officials have it worse, because they know that around every corner is some jackwagon with a cellphone camera ready to take something out of context, so they can get their 15 minutes of youtube fame."

            To bad. If they are public officials, I say get over it, they are now the new Britney spears, with everything they say or do being monitored by the public and there forever. They choose this life, let them live it in the spot light.

            ""that government is best which governs least" that tends to sound like a call to anarchy, the absence of government."

            Oh yeah its crazy talk ... It is not anarchy, its a balance. A balance between government intervention and peoples right to live their lives.

            "http://www.nofoodtaxes.com/"

            You are supporting the rights of a lobby group for the corn syrup industry .... LOL ... to funny ...

            If people believe the ad, I say let them. Its evolution in action.

            The end ....

            This quote is from torrentfreak today. And so you know he reworked a couple lines from Jew in Germany circa WW II.

            "First they came for the Napsters, and I didnít speak out because I wasnít a Napster. Then they came for the Torrents, and I didnít speak out because I didnít use Torrents. Then they came for the file-sharers, and I didnít speak out because I wasnít a file-sharer"

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 7:41am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            "I think it has crossed the line and gone from just being observant to being an annoyance, a hinderance"
            Wait... what? are we supposed to coddle our government now? If they were working for us instead of special interests and lobby income, they wouldn't have to worry about our oversight.

            And the enemy of progress is the fear of change. Fear itself has been a fuel of progress throughout history... look how the fear of death and disease has worked our for the health industry.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:19am

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

              Wait... what? are we supposed to coddle our government now?

              No, that isn't the point? Why does everything have to end up as a bizarre absolute? Are you unable to understand the idea of a middle ground, compared to the two extremes?

              What happens as more people come in to look at things, someone is bound to find something they don't like, real or imagined. They use to refer to those people as crackpots, local cranks, whatever. Now they have a camera and a youtube account, and they think they can change the world. All it does is stop progress.

              You want to build a new sidewalk? Some crank will be on there about damage to their grass, or how concrete ruins the environment, or how the birds in the trees will be effected by the trucks on the street. These were people who would stand up in city council meetings, say their piece, and be overruled for just being the cranks they are.

              Now, they put it on youtube, make a blog, tweet, whatever, and make a few other people think they are right (even when they are wrong) and the whole process goes to crap.

              Stop your city truck to get gas, and some citizen notices that you take a few minutes to get a coffee. They film it and put it on youtube as "city workers take extra coffee breaks", not realizing that perhaps when his break was on before, he was working and couldn't stop. What does it do? It encourages the worker to take his coffee break in the middle of work, and as a result take longer to complete his job. The observing became a hinderance.

              The idea in the end is to be observant, to raise the flag when something is really wrong. But at the same time, most people don't have scale (as you have shown with your bizarre absolute argument above), and as a result, they feel they need to report everything all the time. It isn't beneficial.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 12:02pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

                No, that isn't the point? Why does everything have to end up as a bizarre absolute? Are you unable to understand the idea of a middle ground, compared to the two extremes?
                Hmm... interesting. I though that having discussions online about things over which people disagree ('on-line' being the new public forum... hence the name "forum" for these little online areas) was the middle ground between (government autonomy with no oversight) and (blowing up what we don't like).

                how is it not coddling the government when someone says "stop asking all those questions! the government is afraid of doing anything for fear of someone not liking it!"


                (insert sidewalk analogy)
                Good analogy, actually. But let me ask you this... if the majority want a sidewalk and a few don't... should that few just shut up and take the sidewalk? How is their opinion about grass vs concrete less valid just because they're the minority? And are all minority dissenters "crackpots" who should be dismissed? I don't think you believe that, so why bring it here? Are you saying that we're crackpots who should be dismissed?


                "Stop your city truck to get gas, and some citizen notices that you take a few minutes to get a coffee. They film it and put it on youtube as "city workers take extra coffee breaks", not realizing that perhaps when his break was on before, he was working and couldn't stop. What does it do? It encourages the worker to take his coffee break in the middle of work, and as a result take longer to complete his job. The observing became a hinderance."
                No... that's the sensationalist media making a hindrance... the observation and posting didn't. And I think you're the one taking things to an extreme with this one. Give me an example where someone made a singular observation that lead to such a hindrance that didn't turn out to be the tip of a bigger iceberg? And if you want to stay on this channel, how about we flip it around? What if that coffee break observation lead to an investigation that revealed that these truck drivers really were 'wasting time' or otherwise costing taxpayers more money? Should it all have just stayed quiet and we all just keep paying because the alternative is a hindrance? What about the later result of a more efficient system with proper oversight?


                "The idea in the end is to be observant, to raise the flag when something is really wrong. But at the same time, most people don't have scale (as you have shown with your bizarre absolute argument above), and as a result, they feel they need to report everything all the time. It isn't beneficial."
                Based in who's definition of "really wrong"? In my opinion*, the war is really wrong, the treatment of Manning is wrong, but I don't really care as much about the healthcare reform. My matter of scale tells me that the healthcare reform can go leap so long as we have other things more important to work on. So who's to say which of my opinions I should engage in discussion and become active over? Oh, that's right... it would be me.

                And I'm going to disagree with you on what is beneficial in full disclosure. I think that stopping any of that information is wrong, and it's up to us (as decision makers) to filter the data that is pertinent to us. I'll show you everything... it's up to you to decide which bits are most important to you.


                *Everyone please note: my points of opinion here are for illustrative purposes... I will not engage in discussion on those particular points in this thread. Please don't attempt to argue me on those. Thank you.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 12:32pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

                In your opinion without any evidence submitted.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                identicon
                Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:17pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

                "You want to build a new sidewalk? Some crank will be on there about damage to their grass, or how concrete ruins the environment, or how the birds in the trees will be effected by the trucks on the street. These were people who would stand up in city council meetings, say their piece, and be overruled for just being the cranks they are.

                Now, they put it on youtube, make a blog, tweet, whatever, and make a few other people think they are right (even when they are wrong) and the whole process goes to crap."

                Yes, because somehow you, or some judge, is the only one capable of logically evaluating his sidewalk position and everyone else is not and so everyone else will illogically believe him and that will cause everyone to vote for politicians that will make unreasonable decisions. How condescendingly arrogant. and you accuse others of using fear mongering to promote extreme positions and not being able to understand the idea of a middle ground, just look in the mirror your hypocrite.

                Also, you should make yourself familiar with the middle ground fallacy.

                http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_to_moderation

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

              •  
                icon
                techflaws.org (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:42pm

                Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

                The idea in the end is to be observant, to raise the flag when something is really wrong.

                And that's exactly what is happening. The only reason ppl can't lower the flag is that government is doing that much wrong.

                 

                reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            identicon
            Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:58pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            "I think it has crossed the line and gone from just being observant to being an annoyance, a hinderance. I think that public officials are so scared to offend anyone, to use a wrong work in a report, literally to move forward that they would rather stand pat. "

            This sounds like a bunch of FUD to me.

            "When you create fear, you slow progress."

            So why are you trying to down progress by attempting to create all of this unsubstantiated fear.

            "It's why FUD is the common weapon of choice these days online."

            The common choice by people like you. Heck, the IP maximists and the mainstream media spreads more FUD than anyone.

            "CD Players are going to kill the music industry"

            "If copy protection laws don't last 95+ years, musicians will starve"

            http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20101005/12204511290/why-won-t-universal-music-let-you-s ee-the-20-20-report-from-1980-about-how-the-music-industry-is-dying.shtml

            http://www.techdirt.com /articles/20100624/1640199954.shtml

            http://www.techdirt.com/articles/20110113/14494112661/techno- panics-forty-years-ago-narrated-orson-welles.shtml

            etc...

            give me a break.

            The mainstream media is perfectly capable of fear mongering without the Internet and the only one fear mongering here is people like you. Our fears, on the other hand, are already a reality and their consequences are already a reality (ie: 95+ year copy protection laws with continuous extensions and the devastation that does to the public domain).

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              identicon
              Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:03pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

              If anything, the MSM doesn't spread such FUD as much anymore (though they still do) because the Internet won't let them get away with it as easily. The MSM is required to actually have a tiny bit of journalistic integrity in this day and age and your problem is that it doesn't suite your agenda.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Any Mouse (profile), Feb 7th, 2011 @ 2:59pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            "http://www.nofoodtaxes.com/"

            Yeah, umm... Try reading it, sometime. It's taxes on things like soda and sugary beverages. Things that are already taxed in Ohio, where I live. The taxes are 'supposedly' meant to push people away from consuming such things, but really are about lining the coffers. These sorts of 'sin taxes' never really do what they say they will in the majority.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 1:37am

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        Flash news the government is already paralyzed :)

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        velox (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:47am

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        "Actually, what you are seeing is the breakdown of structured society, where people think they have the right (and some would suggest) obligation to stick their noses into everything. Rather than working to get the right people running the show, they elect idiots through incredibly partisan politics, and then nit-pick at the work of their underlings. Where this is heading is paralysis, where nobody in power dares to take a decision for fear of offending some idiot with a keyboard and a free wordpress account."
        God forbid that a citizen should oppose or disagree with the "people running the show". You think that expressing opinion will lead to paralysis. Why don't you just come right out and say that you want an authoritarian state. People are much more likely to 'behave' and do what their told without annoying criticism in an authoritarian state.

        The comment you just made is exactly why I oppose the IP maximalist agenda. At the end of the day, it sees nothing, including constitutional principle, that should stand in the way of profit. I am a business person myself and I am not opposed to profit - yours or mine. I am opposed to trying to use the law in ways which undermine our country's freedom.

        And for the record, while you or some of your other AC colleagues here seem to think that TD is populated by pirate kiddies, for me this is not a piracy issue. I'm not much into music. I don't have an MP player and I rarely watch movies at home.
        In other words, I'm not a downloader looking for cover.

        I am here because I think your agenda is wrong for our country. If that is what you mean by "stick their nose into everything", then Guilty As Charged.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:19am

          Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

          Well said, thank you.

          I'm all for profits and sensible business strategies. Not a pirate either. But I am also fiercely against laws that protect visionless enterprise via curtailment or disregard of citizens' rights. This scares the hell out of me.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 10:24am

          Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

          I am here because I think your agenda is wrong for our country. If that is what you mean by "stick their nose into everything", then Guilty As Charged

          It isn't an agenda. You can check out anything you want, just don't get in the way of it actually getting done. The problem I see is that so many people are busy playing private detective and youtube journalist that the very people we count on to do the jobs that need doing every day are spending more and more time on "being exactly right to avoid problems" and less and less time on actually getting the job done.

          If you want to run your city, your country, the world, then get into politics yourself. It is as easy as pie to stand out on the outside and launch verbal (or video) bombs into the fray, but it's different when you actually take responsibility and do something about it. If you want to change the system, get involved.

          if you just want to be meddlesome and tell other people what to do, keep up the good work. You are well on your way to "hey you kids, get off my lawn" without even realizing it.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 11:19am

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            "The problem I see is that so many people are busy playing private detective and youtube journalist that the very people we count on to do the jobs that need doing every day are spending more and more time on "being exactly right to avoid problems" and less and less time on actually getting the job done."
            I don't think that's the problem... If they are doing the right job for the right reasons, then they should not fear the increased scrutiny. If the doers are worried about their actions being 'called out', they should ask "why would people have problems with what I'm doing, and should I be doing it in that case?"

            If there are more crackpots who are now more visible/vocal that will call out against everything that the doers do, they'd still be the minority since the number of "regular people" will be increased well. Thus, the ones who are not in agreement with the majority will still be out-voted and out-voiced. but then again, just because these 'crackpots' don't agree with the majority does not mean that their voice should not be heard.

            Or do you feel that dissenting opinion should be repressed? It almost sounds that way.


            If you want to run your city, your country, the world, then get into politics yourself. It is as easy as pie to stand out on the outside and launch verbal (or video) bombs into the fray, but it's different when you actually take responsibility and do something about it. If you want to change the system, get involved.

            if you just want to be meddlesome and tell other people what to do, keep up the good work. You are well on your way to "hey you kids, get off my lawn" without even realizing it."
            Again, why are these two things mutually exclusive? You seem to think that just because I talk about issues online that I'm not also writing letters to my representatives and supporting movements financially & with man-hours.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

            •  
              icon
              velox (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 1:42pm

              Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

              "do you feel that dissenting opinion should be repressed? It almost sounds that way"
              ... almost???
              ... sounds that way???

              It is that way.

               

              reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            velox (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 2:41pm

            Re: Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

            "It isn't an agenda."
            You are posting anonymously, and I don't know you, so perhaps you don't have an agenda, but there sure as hell is an governmental IP agenda being pursued right now by the entertainment industry. This is first and foremost with respect to laws within the United States, and secondarily to spread that body of law throughout the world using trade agreements.

            The current round of activity:
            -- COICA
            -- ACTA
            -- TPP

            Further, all you have to do is read the boasts of individuals posting on this site about coming changes in law to allow monitoring and control of internet activity. Some of these claims made right here within the past few days.

            If you want to hear congressional staff members discuss the IP issues which are being considered in Washington during this legislative session. It is a revealing conversation (a video recording done about 3 weeks ago) focused largely on how to tighten IP laws further. You will note that 4 out of the 5 panelists are from the state of California. It's a simple reflection of the entertainment industry lobby from that state.
            So you say there is "no agenda". Does the industry have lobbyists? Have you ever met a lobbyist without an agenda?.
            Lest you think that I don't know how legislative agendas are pursued, let me just say that, although I am not a professional lobbyist, I have flown to DC, and stood in the offices of my state's elected delegation to both the House and Senate and spoken with them myself. I know first hand that lobbying works.
            "being exactly right to avoid problems" and less and less time on actually getting the job done
            Sorry. This argument is worthless.
            Lawmakers need to get it right, and they had better get it right the first time, since the US has a terrible record at all levels of government with respect to evaluating and fixing laws that subsequently are found to have unintended and unfortunate consequences.
            ---> Bad law is worse than no law at all.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:31pm

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        "where people think they have the right (and some would suggest) obligation to stick their noses into everything."

        We have the right to stick our noses into what the government does because we pay taxes.

        "Where this is heading is paralysis, where nobody in power dares to take a decision for fear of offending some idiot with a keyboard and a free wordpress account."

        What we had before was plutocracy, where everything the government does (ie: 95+ year copy protection laws) was to serve big corporations. Hopefully now we will move in the direction of destroying such plutocracy.

        and just because laws aren't moving as quickly in the direction that you would like them to move doesn't mean there is paralysis.

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:39pm

          Re: Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

          and besides, politicians had always been hesitant to take a position on many things long before the Internet. Heck, politicians have long avoided discussing many issues on mainstream media and the media often lets them get away with it. If anything, the fact that people on the Internet ask many questions that the MSM overlooks (ie: what is this politicians stance on copy protection laws) encourages politicians to publicly take a stance on many issues instead of avoiding having to take such a stance during elections and later on taking a stance that isn't representative of voters (but is, instead, representative of whoever contributed the most in campaign contributions, as evidenced by the length of copy protection laws which I highly doubt is representative of voters).

          Even when it comes to questions that politicians are asked on the mainstream media, politicians have always been hesitant to take a stance. How many presidential (and political) debates have you seen in the past? Politicians dodging questions with non - answers has probably been around since (and before) the printing press.

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        identicon
        Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:41pm

        Re: Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

        "Where this is heading is paralysis, where nobody in power dares to take a decision for fear of offending some idiot with a keyboard and a free wordpress account."

        Also, why doesn't this apply to you as a commenter on this blog? If you really don't like where this is heading, why are you contributing to it by commenting and visiting such blogs?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 7:30am

      Re: Who would have thought being able to talk to anyone anytime would cause this.

      Thanks! :)

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 7:44pm

    Once again, Terry Hart explains it best; this time the subject is the ICE Super Bowl seizures.

    http://www.copyhype.com/2011/02/super-bowl-seizures

    Of course, all the tech geeks and freetards here, none of whom are lawyers, will stomp their feet, plug their ears, and cover their eyes to try and pretend reality doesn't exist.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Hephaestus (profile), Feb 5th, 2011 @ 8:44pm

      Re:

      Dude to funny :p In each paragraph he brings up a different subject and links them together nicely, but they are all totally different subjects with statements that very loosely match up with US or foreign law.

      It is political speak with no basis in reality or law.

      Please play or try again after the superbowl commercials tomorrow.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      The eejit (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 3:15am

      Re:

      ON the conrtray, I understand Hart's logic - but there's one fatal flaw. ICE seized the domains for direct infringement. At best, what the Spanish website does is indirect infringement, which is NOT a criminal case. In ram applies, but the accusation is incorrect.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        Terry Hart (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 8:12pm

        Re: Re:

        Re-read the post, as it addresses precisely what you call a fatal flaw. The domains were not seized based on direct infringement or indirect infringement -- they were seized as property used to facilitate the commission of infringement.

        Like if the cops seized a getaway car. It's irrelevant who owns the car, or if the driver is the actual bank robber, an accomplice, or just a buddy doing a favor. What's relevant is whether the property has a substantial connection to the commission of the crime (with an exception for the "innocent owner").

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      freak (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 5:07am

      Re:

      Y'kow, in forfeiture cases in 'real life', I have never once heard of anyone seizing the address number of a house.

      Like, the decorative numbers on someone's postal box, or maybe beside their front door.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

      •  
        icon
        freak (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 5:20am

        Re: Re:

        Just to bring up a counter-argument:

        "Than why are domain names worth anything at all? Why should you care?"

        Good question.
        When I say "Seize the address number", I don't mean just the numbers you stuck on your mail box, but the ability to put up new ones that say the same number, as well.
        That is: If I live at 10 Maine Drive, and my address number is seized, I could put up 11, or 1, or 389472349, but not 10.

        The damage that it does to me can be huge. For an ordinary person, he has to update all his less-than-daily contacts and tell them he now lives at Y, not X, but his house is in the same physical location. And it's still a huge bother to him.
        Imagine you're running a business out of your house though. Although you probably have a sign up, which greatly mitigates the problem, and heck, most of your customers probably know the sign more than the address anyhow. But you can't do that on the internet.
        So imagine a brick and mortar which suddenly changes address numbers, and whose customers find it by looking for the address number. Like, say, a discrete plastic surgery business.
        Overnight, you go from having so many customers per day, to none. Because they can't find your business. You still have your reputation, but when that customer from last year recommends you to her neighbour, her neighbour can't find your address.
        You have to start from nearly the beginning again with building up clientele. And hey, someone remind me what the chance of failure within a year is for a new business as opposed to a business that's been around for a couple of years? Around 60-70% higher, isn't it?

         

        reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

        •  
          identicon
          Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:06am

          Re: Re: Re:

          But on the Internet, where most people just use Google, is it that relevant?

           

          reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

          •  
            icon
            freak (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 9:24am

            Re: Re: Re: Re:

            Alright, let's try "internet radio"

            Think about whichever internet radio service you use.

            Was it pandora? That's the first result google finds.
            So old customers who are familiar with you are still re-routed to competitors, nice to know.

            And then, we also have to consider page rank. All the old links, and all the google search engine preference goes to "10 maine drive", not to your new address. Gonna be hard to get up there in google results even with your own name if your old one is taken away, eh? You even have to compete with your old name, which points only to a takedown notice.

            So google won't find you, but it will find competitors.

             

            reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      techflaws.org (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 6:27am

      Re:

      "to try and pretend reality doesn't exist"

      That's rich coming from a shilltard constantly trying to convice himself that the seizures will stop piracy. Keep dreaming.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Gabriel Tane (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 7:48am

      Re:

      so sayeth the non-lawyer fool who has never backed up their statements with fact (you know.. reality) and refuses to admit error when everyone else is not only showing him errors, but doing so with citations and fact...

      So... who is refusing reality here?

      So let's look at the score...
      1)ad hominim attacks irrelevant to the conversation
      2)no facts or figures to back it up
      3)pure straight-from-the-source hypocrisy

      Congrats Anon... HAT-TRICK!!

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

    •  
      icon
      Richard (profile), Feb 7th, 2011 @ 3:56am

      Re:

      Of course, all the tech geeks and freetards here, none of whom are lawyers, will stomp their feet, plug their ears, and cover their eyes to try and pretend reality doesn't exist.
      Of course all the lawyers and corporate apologists here (none of whom understand the implications of the technology) will stomp their feet and plug their ears and pretend that reality (mathematical, physical and economic laws) can be held back by the laws of man.

      Cnut thou should be living at this hour.

       

      reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous, Feb 5th, 2011 @ 8:51pm

    In each paragraph he brings up a different subject and links them together nicely

    Yes, that's for the slow learners.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    identicon
    Anonymous Coward, Feb 6th, 2011 @ 3:30am

    Friends! Countrymen! Techdirt-ians! Lend me your... eyes!


    I'm afraid of lending my eyes to you for fear of not being able to reattach them again after I get them back.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    TPBer (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 12:13pm

    What's the real point here?

    I, for one, love the continuous enlightenment on this site about how one sided our govt appears to be with regard to the net.

    The bottom line is no one company, country, industry, fill in the blank, controls the net. This seems to be the biggest denial of all time. On one hand you have the US/ICE trying their hardest to earn their payola from big media, on the other hand is the reality that the net is owned by all users. Why is so hard to undertand? No amount of attempted censorship is going to even put a dent in this, but apparently the perception of control is the end goal.

    I dunno, I just moved my biz to a neutral place and will move on without the worries of US censorship.

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]

  •  
    icon
    velox (profile), Feb 6th, 2011 @ 2:48pm

    Good work today G.T. -- both in the original post and in subsequent comment!

     

    reply to this | link to this | view in chronology ]


Add Your Comment

Have a Techdirt Account? Sign in now. Want one? Register here
Get Techdirt’s Daily Email
Save me a cookie
  • Note: A CRLF will be replaced by a break tag (<br>), all other allowable HTML will remain intact
  • Allowed HTML Tags: <b> <i> <a> <em> <br> <strong> <blockquote> <hr> <tt>
Follow Techdirt
A word from our sponsors...
Essential Reading
Techdirt Reading List
Techdirt Insider Chat
A word from our sponsors...
Recent Stories
A word from our sponsors...

Close

Email This