from the the-observer-effect dept
As the back-and-forth over Aereo's status grows more fascinatingly insane, so too do the comments about it grow more insightful, funny and popular, with three of this week's four winners coming from our post about Aereo embracing its new status as a de facto duck. First up is vegetaman, who topped the voting on the insightful side with his version of the agenda of Aereo's opponents:
"Your honor, we'd only like Aereo to be treated like a cable company when it suits us, and then not treated like one when it doesn't. Much like how Verizon wants to be under Title II for subsidies. But not for anything else. See, we've got precendent!"
In second place on the insightful side, we've got a comment from Violynne that racked up lots of funny votes as well, responding to the DHS requiring travelers to hand over their cellphones, powered up:
FAA: Turn off all devices.
DHS: Turn on all devices.
Our wonderful government is so screwed up, they can't even give the same instructions to its people.
For editor's choice on the insightful side, we start by going back to last week's comments post, where a discussion about the Mayday PAC led to this excellent anonymous comment on the dangers (and inefficacy) of political factionalism:
I really think there's a big problem with titles like Democrat, Republican, Libertarian, Conservative, Right-Wing, Left-Wing, Tea Party, etc etc.
It gives people a side to rally under even if all of the opinions of the title don't necessarily align with your own and forces people to give up on certain issues.
It gives people a side to attack, to demonize, to dismiss whenever someone has a difference in opinion, similar to discrimination. Honestly, the way they're being used in a negative, attacking way in recent years makes me see them more and more as slurs.
Depending on who you ask on which issue I'm either far-right or far-left. If I'm both, then I'm neither. It's just a fallacy to dismiss my opinion because it differs. And it's getting worse. It's become acceptable to just be against someone because of their side and for no other reason.
We need to be about the issues, not sides. We need to vote for people who are about fixing the issues we are concerned about, not voting down party lines.
We need to be about voting the people best suited for the job, not voting against the other side. There shouldn't be Democrats, Republicans, Libertarians, Conservatives. There should just be people with concerns on issues they want to fix.
Next, we've got a comment from sehlat that clarifies something which should always be kept in mind when we talk about the growing obsolescence of large publishers (and it applies just as well to record labels and other gatekeepers) — nobody's saying that they do nothing of value, just that the terms on which those things happen are going to change:
The people who WORK at publishers aren't parasites. Editors, copyeditors, proofreaders, typesetters all contribute to the product.
The people who RUN the publishers are lawyers, accountants, and investors. Lawyers ask "Who can we hurt so they don't hurt us?" and the latter two ask "How you going to make money with that?" Product? Quality? Who cares?
There is NO major publisher that is run by book lovers, and it shows.
(As some commenters pointed out, Baen bucks this trend, and sehlat noted that he wasn't considering them a part of the "Big Five Cabal".)
Over on the funny side, it's back to Aereo. A whole lot of people cooked up quantum physics jokes in response to Aereo's undetermined legal status, and the first place winner was Gwiz — but his comment was actually in response to the second-place winner, which was anonymous. So I'm going to take the rare step of presenting both comments together in chronological order, which is the reverse of vote ranking (hey, it's about quantum physics, so I might as well make it confusing):
AC: Summarizing, we have a quantum duck that's both a duck and not a duck.
Gwiz: Schrödinger's CATV.
For editor's choice on the funny side, we head to the revelation (which came as a surprise to nobody) that Keurig's new "interactive" brewer features offer a lot in the way of blocking unapproved coffee pods and very little in the way of compelling interactivity. Just as the Aereo situation called for quantum comedy, the Keurig situation apparently called for riffs on classic sci-fi quotes — and much like the Aereo post, we've got one from Gwiz and one from an anonymous commenter. First up, Gwiz hitches a ride on a timeless Douglas Adams line:
Every time I've used a Keurig machine (a relative owns one) all I end up with is a cup filled with a liquid that is almost, but not quite, entirely unlike tea.
And last but not least, a proposed replacement for "Oops!":
I'm sorry, Dave, I can't let you brew that.
(I feel there's a "red-eye" joke to be made here, but I leave it to you to flesh it out.)
That's all for this week, folks!