Diogenes 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (485)

• On the post: Appeals Court: ‘Plain View” Also Includes Using iPhone Camera Options To See Through Tinted Car Windows

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2025 @ 04:44am

  tinted windows are illegal

  Its also illegal in most jurisdictions to tint your car windows that much. Police usually wont bother writing tickets for it, but that doesnt make it legal.

• On the post: BBC Study Finds “AI” Chatbots Routinely Incapable Of Basic News Synopses

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 20 Feb, 2025 @ 04:20pm

  the problem with LLM

  It is terrible at reporting facts, but really good at sounding like it knows what its talking about. And that is exactly the kind of thing people fall for.

• On the post: The Trump Administration Just Sued IL, Chicago Over State Laws Around Immigration Enforcement

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 16 Feb, 2025 @ 12:39pm

  anti-comandeering principle

  The anti-comandeering principle (or doctrine) says that the federal government cannot make the states enforce federal law. If ICE wants undocumented immigrants arrested they have to do it themselves if the states choose not to.

• On the post: As Elon Musk Continues To Repeat Lies About Who And What USAID Funded, Turns Out, It Funded Elon Musk

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 11 Feb, 2025 @ 07:17am

  say what?

  "Trump, as President, controls funding of the RNC" How the F would the president control funding of a party? He may have enough followers to do a lot of harm but that does not stem from the power of the president.

• On the post: No, Conscripting The App Stores Doesn’t Solve The Problems With Age Verification

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 30 Jan, 2025 @ 02:49pm

  borrowing from reefer madness

  Parent: HOW DID YOU EVEN GET A PORN ACCOUNT? Kid: I GOT IT FROM YOU. ITS YOUR ACCOUNT!

• On the post: Nunes’s SLAPP Suit Over Forgotten Esquire Farm Story Crashes (Again)

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2025 @ 08:40pm

  well yea

  Its slapp when there is no real basis for the lawsuit so its not intended to win in court.

• On the post: Nunes’s SLAPP Suit Over Forgotten Esquire Farm Story Crashes (Again)

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2025 @ 05:23pm

  the other part of a defamation suit

  In the US you also need to show that the supposed defamation was lies. Have they said what they think is untrue about the article? If they have I cant find it.

• On the post: Trump Pardons Ulbricht, Betraying His Demand That Drug Dealers Deserve Death

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 23 Jan, 2025 @ 11:27am

  the only facts that matter

  The only fact that Trump relates is "who is for me and who is against me".

• On the post: Why Google And Apple (And Others) Have No Choice: They Can’t Restart TikTok, They Can Only Fight

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 21 Jan, 2025 @ 05:05pm

  clarifying

  To clarify: If apple or google carry tiktok illegally and someone gets hurt they can be liable. Im not sure tiktok would be breaking the law but if they were then 230 wont protect them either. If you break the law you are liable if someone suffers harm.

• On the post: Why Google And Apple (And Others) Have No Choice: They Can’t Restart TikTok, They Can Only Fight

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 21 Jan, 2025 @ 04:22pm

  as well as civil damages

  They also open themselves up to civil lawsuits. When tiktok was legal if a kid was harmed due to seeing something "not safe for kids" they were protected from lawsuits by the 1st amendment and also "dont let tiktok babysit your kids". But if kids are harmed by watching something that wasnt even legal in the first place thats a different story. And the "kids harmed" is just spice. There are a plethora of damages suits that can come about if they break the law carrying tiktok. Just because the government chooses not to enforce a law doesnt make it legal.

• On the post: In Upholding The TikTok Ban, SCOTUS Compromises, And With It The First Amendment

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2025 @ 10:08pm

  non-enforcement is meaningless

  Trump can say he wont enforce it but as long as the law is on the books carriers would need to obey the law and not carry tiktok. They cant just ignore it on Trump's word that there wont be consequences.

• On the post: SCOTUS: TikTok’s China Connection Is So Scary & Urgent, We Can Ban An Entire App. Biden Admin: Just Kidding, We Won’t Enforce It

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2025 @ 01:21pm

  So it was a bluff

  They thought they could intimidate Bytedance into selling. When bytedance said FU then they panicked.

• On the post: SCOTUS: TikTok’s China Connection Is So Scary & Urgent, We Can Ban An Entire App. Biden Admin: Just Kidding, We Won’t Enforce It

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 17 Jan, 2025 @ 01:19pm

  Nah the world doesnt work like that

  You cant just say "we wont enforce it". If the law says carriers have to drop tiktok they will drop it. They cant just trust you that there will be no consequences if they dont.

• On the post: Biden’s TikTok Flip-Flop: President Rushes To Undo Ban He Championed As Backlash Grows

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 16 Jan, 2025 @ 02:38pm

  It doesnt make sense anyway

  Divesting tiktok from China doesnt make sense anyway. China could just sell to someone who for love or money or blackmail will just give or sell them the data anyway. And it would be legal since congress refuses to pass legislation forbidding sale of data. And the same goes for the propaganda argument. If whoever they sold to turned out to seem friendly to China there would be no way to prove whether they were beholden to China or not. Thats not something you can legislate.

• On the post: Biden’s TikTok Flip-Flop: President Rushes To Undo Ban He Championed As Backlash Grows

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 16 Jan, 2025 @ 10:38am

  The US government blinked

  US: Divest or shut down. tiktok: ok we will shut down US: Wait, not that!

• On the post: TikTok Users Gleefully Embrace Even More Chinese App To Spite US TikTok Ban

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 15 Jan, 2025 @ 04:12pm

  bytedance doesnt have 1st amendment rights?!

  Amy Coney Barrett said Bytedance doesnt have first amendment rights. That bothers me for two reasons. 1. The first amendment doesnt give the right of freedom of speech. It limits congress' power to restrict speech. Which they are doing right now. 2. If a foreign owner doesnt have 1st amendment rights, then that opens the door to say they dont have any constitutional rights. So Trump could just take tiktok and give it to Musk if he felt like it. And that wouldnt just affect Bytedance, but all foreign owners of anything.

• On the post: In His Amicus Brief Trump Tells SCOTUS That The Copia Institute Is Right (OK, Perhaps Inadvertently)

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 08 Jan, 2025 @ 11:56am

  Nope to that

  IIUC he isnt arguing that the law be overturned but that the scotus not rule at all and let him decide on it. IMO the question of tiktok is minor compared to the effect on rule of law that this argument represents. I could support him arguing yes or no on the law, but him arguing that scotus should not rule either way is obscene.

• On the post: Google Street View Car Inadvertently Helps Solve Year-Old Spanish Murder Case

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 29 Dec, 2024 @ 10:08am

  how did they think of this?

  How on earth did any cop think to go through street views to look for evidence on a year old murder?

• On the post: NYPD, NYC Gov’t Continue Freefall As Top Cop Resigns Following Allegations Of Sexual Misconduct

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 26 Dec, 2024 @ 07:49pm

  the reason why

  Sometimes I think these guys only hire dirty people because that way they have leverage against them.

• On the post: Federal Court Blocks Louisiana Law Mandating Posting Of Ten Commandments In School Classrooms

  

  Diogenes ( profile ), 26 Nov, 2024 @ 06:40am

  next thing they will want us to tithe to their church

  Oh wait, we already do give to their church - through taxpayer funding of religious schools.

Next >>