Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

from the last-of-2015 dept

With our week truncated by the holidays, voting was a little slow this time around. Nevertheless, we have a runaway winner taking the first place spots on both the insightful and funny sides. It came from an anonymous commenter in response to the Manhattan District Attorney's latest attacks on encryption:

Its a miracle anyone solved a crime before smartphones. They must have actually had to interview people, inspect crime scenes, and collect evidence with tweezers and cotton swabs. How barbaric!

In second place on the insightful side, we've got another comment on that post, this time from PaulT in response to the assertion that Apple implemented encryption specifically in order to avoid complying with law enforcement:

No, it implemented encryption largely due to customer demand as a result of news about extrajudicial activities by law enforcement.

Is it that these politicians are actually this stupid on this or that they think their constituents are?

For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start by flipping over to another attack on encryption, this time from Senator Tom Cotton. Angel posited a simple analogy:

Me: "Hey Tom Cotton Why don't you leave your front door unlocked in case law enforcement needs to get in, if they have a warrent"

Tom Cotton: "Because that would be unsafe, than anyone could just walk in"

Me: "Ohhhh really....."

Next, we've got CanadianByChoice with some thoughts on the true and worrying potential extent of Europe's right to be forgotten:

This won't only be a tool to "silence free speech" and "punish innovation" - it will be a tool to rewrite history. What stops articles about Tiananmen Square or the Holocaust from being removed in the name of the "Right To Be Forgotten"? When we manage to do that (forget history), it's certain that we will repeat it.

Over on the funny side, we've already had our first place comment above, so we'll move straight on to second place, which comes in response to our post about a nineteen-hour "standoff" with law enforcement that ended with officers storming an empty house. Apparently, a hotspot picked up on infrared camera was part of why they thought the house was occupied, leading one anonymous commenter to muse about what really happened:

When questioned if the sun might have created the hot spot in the attic the police responded:

"These cameras pick up hot spots created by hiding humans, thats what they are designed for. There is no way that the hot spots we detected could have been caused by anything other than a gang member hiding. Furthermore at 9am the hot spot was on the east side of the attic but at 4pm it had moved to the west side of the attic. Clearly this was a human moving around in the attic, there is no way that the sun could have caused a hot spot to move!"

For editor's choice on the funny side, we return one last time to our post about Manhattan's DA, where Blaine proposed a novel (if somewhat spiteful) way to send a message about encryption:

These people pushing to ban encryption should set a good example and stop using this evil technology. No encrypted files on their phones, computers or portable drives. No HTTPS for any web sites.

In fact as a trial run how about all tech companies just force HTTP on any connection from a gov owned ip?

This would have a couple benefits.

First, of course, they can show us how a good citizen behaves and that it's completely safe.

Second, FOIA requests would go down, since we could just go get whatever we want.

Win Win

Finally, after AT&T and DirecTV managed to simultaneously raise their rates while claiming they were protecting customers from higher prices, That One Guy suggested we were being a bit hard on them:

I'm not sure where the sarcasm came from in the end there, this is absolutely helping out consumers.

After all if the services were notably different, in price or offerings, think of all the time people would waste trying to decide between the two. With both increasing the prices however, there's no need to think at all, saving countless brain-cells from being put to the test. Whichever you chose, you get hosed, what's not consumer friendly about that?

That's all for this week — and, indeed, this year — folks!

Hide this

Thank you for reading this Techdirt post. With so many things competing for everyone’s attention these days, we really appreciate you giving us your time. We work hard every day to put quality content out there for our community.

Techdirt is one of the few remaining truly independent media outlets. We do not have a giant corporation behind us, and we rely heavily on our community to support us, in an age when advertisers are increasingly uninterested in sponsoring small, independent sites — especially a site like ours that is unwilling to pull punches in its reporting and analysis.

While other websites have resorted to paywalls, registration requirements, and increasingly annoying/intrusive advertising, we have always kept Techdirt open and available to anyone. But in order to continue doing so, we need your support. We offer a variety of ways for our readers to support us, from direct donations to special subscriptions and cool merchandise — and every little bit helps. Thank you.

–The Techdirt Team

Reader Comments

Subscribe: RSS

View by: Time | Thread

  1. icon
    Justin (profile), 27 Dec 2015 @ 5:57pm

    I always wondered the process we were going to use to ban books in an Orwellian society, now I realize that it it's going to be through the right to be forgotten.

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

  2. identicon
    Digitari, 28 Dec 2015 @ 4:17am


    Sorry, forgot what you were saying.......... :)

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

  3. icon
    That One Guy (profile), 28 Dec 2015 @ 4:54am


    'Orwellian'? I'm afraid I don't get the reference. Any time I try and search for it via the government approved search engines, I keep getting a 'The subject of your search has been determined to be counter-productive to society, and the results removed for your safety.' Also apparently I've been added to a list of some sort for performing the search in the first place, strange that.

    Eh, I'm sure I'm not missing anything important, it's not like the government doesn't know what's best for everyone after all, and if they say it's bad, that's good enough for me.

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

  4. identicon
    Seriously Folks, 28 Dec 2015 @ 2:34pm

    New Business Model

    A promising new business model comes to us in hopes of legislation to ban texting by drivers operating motor vehicles by making it a felony.

    Video taping drivers texting while driving through dicovery and license plate inquiry, suing the bijesus out of them AND their insurance companies. That ought to push the legislation through speedily in a perfect world. Everyone who grimaces at the rearview mirror seeing someone's head buried in their blue lit smart phones screen.

    When I make enough from all those lawsuits, I'm going after the technology itself and every company out there supplying the capability for this dumb tech novelty endangering lives recklessly. I have been struck twice from behind by drivers who climbed out of their vehicles with a smart phone in their dumb hands. It gets you looking behind you much more frequently than one should.


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

  5. identicon
    Seriously Folks, 28 Dec 2015 @ 2:42pm

    Re: New Business Model FTFY

    Everyone who grimaces at the rearview mirror seeing someone's head buried in their blue lit smart phones screen.. join in! If an insurance company does not explicitly prohibit texting while driving and insures people regardless, they are complicit and are making the roads much more dangerous. If the telcos don't hand over data that relates to an accident, they are also complicit and obstructing justice.

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

  6. identicon
    God Damn It, 30 Dec 2015 @ 5:37pm

    Laughing Anti-Christ

    What ever cock-eyed reason kissinger is putting clinton in as president, I don't trust him or them or you. I certainly am sympathetic towards the troops and America seemingly losing this fight against the new world order.

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

Add Your Comment

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)


Add A Reply

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

Subscribe to the Techdirt Daily newsletter

Comment Options:

  • Use markdown. Use plain text.
  • Make this the First Word or Last Word. No thanks. (get credits or sign in to see balance)    
  • Remember name/email/url (set a cookie)

Follow Techdirt
Essential Reading
Techdirt Deals
Report this ad  |  Hide Techdirt ads
Techdirt Insider Chat
Recent Stories

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it

Email This

This feature is only available to registered users. Register or sign in to use it.