Violynne’s Techdirt Profile

petrifiedjello

About ViolynneTechdirt Insider




Violynne’s Comments comment rss

  • Feb 12th, 2016 @ 7:32am

    (untitled comment)

    Of the millions of CenturyLink High-Speed Internet customers, a very small fraction has exceeded the download usage limits provided with their monthly plan. It is for this reason that CenturyLink has made the decision to place download limits on residential plans.

    We threw the baby out with the bathwater because someone peed in your neighbor's pool.

    Makes perfect sense to me. :\

  • Feb 11th, 2016 @ 3:15am

    Re:

    Of course you would, as would damn near every other person on the planet because the first response would be "How the fuck is that ice cream?"

    THAT is the point, to artificially create an object to resemble (by one hell of a stretch of imagination) something that most people wouldn't think of when seeing what they know they're seeing.

    Clever attempt, but poor execution.

    Not that any of this matters. Facebook is in the wrong, especially when its own damn definition of "suggestive content".

    Think about it. What the hell does "suggestive content" mean and why in the hell is that phrase related to sexual content only?

    Wouldn't an ISIS recruitment post be considered "suggestive content"? No, of course not. That's "terrorist propaganda".

    :eye rolling icon desperately needed here:

  • Feb 11th, 2016 @ 3:00am

    (untitled comment)

    It’s pretty egregious for a corporation to try to bully a news organization into deep-sixing comments from its own readers.
    I laughed at this, literally. Not to say Gawker takes part in what I'm about to do, but my Magic Internet Pencil™ has to be used:

    It’s pretty egregious for a news corporation to try to bully a news organization into deep-sixing comments from its own readers.
    All I did was add one word, and damn, how perfect it fits other articles by Techdirt where news sites are trashing their own comments.

    The Power of the Pencil!®

    PS: none of this is ©

  • Feb 9th, 2016 @ 7:18am

    Re: Re:

    A scanner is hardware.

    Apple's software is checking for licensed scanners, not scanner safety in general.

    The software should still work correctly regardless of the hardware in front of it.

  • Feb 9th, 2016 @ 4:57am

    (untitled comment)

    And here's a damn good reason why this change needs to happen:
    http://investmentunderground.com/2016/02/error-53-your-repaired-iphone-is-dead/

    Yeah. Nothing says customer appreciation like Apple's "You're $700 phone is now a piece of shit because we think you had it repaired at a service center where we don't get a cut." response to affected phones.

    Then again, Apple isn't the problem.

  • Feb 9th, 2016 @ 2:56am

    (untitled comment)

    But think of the corn growers, damn it!

    If you give them the ability to repair their own combines, they'll starve to death!

  • Feb 8th, 2016 @ 11:57am

    (untitled comment)

    "Bandai" is Japanese for "Fuck you and open your wallet".

    This company stopped caring about customers when it realized it could charge $19 for a half-ass painted piece of plastic.

  • Feb 4th, 2016 @ 12:05pm

    (untitled comment)

    Yet, come this Sunday, none of this matters because "OMFG! IT'S THE SUPERBOWL!"

    /hates we can't fix stupid.

  • Feb 4th, 2016 @ 10:06am

    Re: Re:

    Except, people tend to forget: this was NOT a feature when the XBox One launched.

    And for the record, it does matter if the feature is well-implemented because if it sucks, then most people won't use the feature (and I'm one of them).

    It's just very frustrating when these companies all push for "social interaction" but then make it damn near impossible to do it.

    Worse: when they don't even give you a choice of service to use.

    Just trying to get a screenshot to my OneDrive account is such a magnanimous pain in the ass, I just stopped trying.

  • Feb 4th, 2016 @ 3:02am

    (untitled comment)

    pecifically the Playstation 4 and Xbox One, are both designed specifically with ways for gamers to record gameplay and share those recordings.
    Okay, now that the tears have stopped flowing from laughing so hard, time to get down to business.

    In what damn planet does a person reside to believe the XBox One was specifically designed to record gameplay and share those recordings?

    First up, as an XBox One owner, the actual mechanism to record the video is clearly an after thought, where a bunch of brain-dead designers sat in a room and asked the question "Of all the console buttons we have, how should we make it the most annoying to record video or take a screenshot?"

    For you non-owners of the 30% App Cut One, the answer is by double clicking the controller's power button quickly, then quickly using the D-pad to select either video or screenshot.

    In case you don't understand why quickly was emphasized, the next time you play a game on any console and hit the controller's start button and note what happens to the game. Better yet: the game pauses, as it should. Thus, if you don't quickly make your options, your video consists of the gorram pause screen.

    Moving onto the other asinine statement is the upload content provider we're forced to deal with, and trust me when I say this, I'm not alone to say THE CONTENT PROVIDER FUCKING SUCKS.

    That provider is Twitch, and the name should ring a bell to fellow Techdirt readers, because this is the same content provider who strips music from video uploads, because all that time you took to edit your finely produced and edited video (now that you can truncate the pause screen) is cut by Twitch.

    In fact, the entire ability is clearly a "We hate the idea of gamers sharing" that people can't even use their own music for their videos (though I could clearly see how this could be "abused", despite the effect having the "Wow! Great song! Who made it?").

    I also enjoy Wil's commentary about all things digital, but I also get the feeling behind his words is a flock of lawyers who guide him on what he can and should say.

    Because you can bet your ass one day, someone will see Wil playing a board game and take the video down.

    If this never happens, the next obvious remark would be "How much did you get paid for this cleverly disguised advertising"?

    That's the bullshit world we live in, and despite Techdirt's repeated articles of how it's clearly getting worse, Wil's practices are now an instructional video on what NOT to do, especially on a media that can reach billions around the world.

    Because lawyers still exist.

  • Jan 27th, 2016 @ 8:56am

    (untitled comment)

    Another cautionary tale, readers...

    "5. Your Rights

    You retain your rights to any Content you submit, post or display on or through the Services. By submitting, posting or displaying Content on or through the Services, you grant us a worldwide, non-exclusive, royalty-free license (with the right to sublicense) to use, copy, reproduce, process, adapt, modify, publish, transmit, display and distribute such Content in any and all media or distribution methods (now known or later developed).

    Tip: This license is you authorizing us to make your Tweets on the Twitter Services available to the rest of the world and to let others do the same."

    ... is to know people waive their rights when using third party services, so any threats of "infringement" can be laughed off with a cocktail made of the tears streaming from the "victim".

    Enjoy!

  • Jan 27th, 2016 @ 8:50am

    (untitled comment)

    Lawyer: 16-Year-Old Shouldn't Be Upset By Explicit Photos Cop Sent Her Because She's Probably Seen Penises On The Internet

    I'm guessing the first dick picture she saw was the profile image of Kennith Anderson when she visited his website.

  • Jan 26th, 2016 @ 12:11pm

    (untitled comment)

    If?

  • Jan 22nd, 2016 @ 10:33am

    (untitled comment)

    One day, we can only hope these morons get to the point there will be no more resolution to the disputes, so that everyone is out of options:
    -Hollywood can't distribute their tired wares
    -Cable can't charge for shows it doesn't have

    But the most important...

    -Customers will finally have no choice but to give up their cable subscription, and help usher in the new way to receive content: digital streaming.

  • Jan 22nd, 2016 @ 3:04am

    (untitled comment)

    That chart embedded in Anderson's tweet highlights the biggest factor every network executive misses.

    Look at the chart closely, and you'll see one thing in common: the more options to entertainment, the bigger impact it has to the "Big 3".

    We can see where the Big 3 originated, then started to change its own lineup (affecting the other station viewership).

    This continues until 1980, or a damn coincidental timing of events that this is about the time cable started making a bigger impact and carrying more stations.

    1995 shows another dip, and huh... wasn't this about the time this fad called the "world wide web" started taking off? Seems like it.

    Netflix... Netflix yeah, been around a long time, but started its streaming business around 2010.

    Damn. That chart is spot on accurate in showing how everyone changes their viewing habits when something new comes about.

    I always chuckled at that "18-49" demographic bullshit. Hollywood never understood this demographic other than to label them "captive audience".

    To this day, Hollywood only knows how to do one thing: insult its audience by using the same model of show creation established in the late 50s.

    Now with full bathroom visuals and non-separated beds.

  • Jan 21st, 2016 @ 8:43am

    (untitled comment)

    There's no doubt that Disney and ESPN will eventually figure things out and balance the need for innovation with their desire to protect their existing businesses...
    Indeed. Here's what that plan will look like:

    WARNING - NSA DIRECTIVE - WATCHING THIS COPYRIGHT MATERIAL WITHOUT A CABLE SUBSCRIPTION IS ILLEGAL UNDER THE US COPYRIGHT ACT OF 2022, SECTION 909, ARTICLE 1.

    VIOLATORS WILL BE SUBJECT TO ASSET FORFEITURE BASED ON ACCUSATION BY DISNEY OR ITS SUBSIDIARIES. TOTAL ASSET FORFEITURE VALUE WILL NOT BE LESS THAN $500,000.

    BY VIEWING THIS COPYRIGHTED WORKS, ALL LEGAL RECOURSE IS WAIVED AND ANY DISPUTES MUST BE SETTLED THROUGH ARBITRATION.

    Of course, it'll be unskippable and last 22 minutes.

  • Jan 21st, 2016 @ 7:11am

    (untitled comment)

    First of all, it's impossible.
    Apparently, someone doesn't know just how powerful Google's ability to censor the internet really is.

    I strongly suggest taking a stroll on the real internet using TOR to see just how confident Google can be about cleaning up anything from the internet.

  • Jan 20th, 2016 @ 6:20am

    (untitled comment)

    ...but it's a temporary hiccup on the path toward Netflix's eventual goal: uniform, consistent content licensing that looks the same in every country...

    *pulls out the Magical Editing Internet Pencil™

    ...but it's a temporary hiccup on the path toward Netflix's eventual goal: owning 100% of its own content while flipping off Hollywood's RICO law breaking tactics, known as licensing, to deliver what people actually want to see...

  • Jan 20th, 2016 @ 3:20am

    (untitled comment)

    If any of these CEOs read this site, a message for them all:

    Too little, too late. You had one job and you blew it.

    What's worse is these idiots still don't get it: we pay for these channels. Why in the hell are we dealing with ads to begin with.

    Never going back.

    Never.

  • Jan 19th, 2016 @ 3:02am

    (untitled comment)

    Nobody denies that cable TV's audience still towers over that of streaming video services.
    I'm denying it.

    The problem is the measurement. It's flawed.

    There's a big difference between recording a show for later viewing and watching it when it airs.

    Given most new shows are still unavailable online, of course cable still has the lion's share of "viewers".

    Nothing like pretending choice exists when everything still revolves around the "captive" audience.

More comments from Violynne >>