Anshar 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (72) comment rss

  • On the post: Politician Wants Google To Blur Street View Images Of Buildings; Next Up: Blurring Reality

    Anshar ( profile ), 04 Mar, 2009 @ 12:12pm

    If this guy thinks that blurring our certain buildings will prevent terrorists from attacking them then I say we let him have his way. In fact, let's blur out every street view image on google - except for Mr. Anderson's house.

  • On the post: A Tale Of Two Studies On File Sharing…

    Anshar ( profile ), 04 Mar, 2009 @ 10:18am

    I am going to send a copy of that first report to my MP in the vain hope that he'll take the time to both read it and understand it.

  • On the post: The Pirate Bay Closing Arguments: Since We Can't Get The Real Infringers, We Should Blame Everything On These Guys

    Anshar ( profile ), 03 Mar, 2009 @ 08:57am

    Re: Re: Re:

    @ Weird Harold: What exactly does DMCA have to do with The Pirate Bay?

  • On the post: The Pirate Bay Closing Arguments: Since We Can't Get The Real Infringers, We Should Blame Everything On These Guys

    Anshar ( profile ), 02 Mar, 2009 @ 03:26pm

    So-called 'losses'

    My main point of contention with the entertainment industry's arguments is their claim that every download is a lost sale.

    I disagree. Reality's post regarding Photoshop makes an outstanding example. Who really thinks that everyone who pirates photoshop would go out and pay $1000 for it if pirating it were (for whatever reason) not an option? Not many, to be sure.

    There are products out there which are worth their prices and there are those which are not. Those which are not worth their prices might be worth a lower price but unless manufacturers and/or vendors drop the "pay this price or don't buy it all" attitude and let the market set a fair price, paying that lower price can't happen. The exception is the used market but then again, the entertainment industry seems to put that on par with piracy anyway.

  • On the post: The Goldilocks Argument For Regulating Online Content In Canada

    Anshar ( profile ), 27 Feb, 2009 @ 05:49pm

    "What's never explained is what's wrong with option (c): make good content that people want to see."

    Speaking as a Canadian I have to say this was a problem long before the Internet was a factor. Until very recently most Canadian-made TV was just... bad. Nevertheless, it got air-time in Canada just because it was Canadian.

    Even with all the regulation that we have, competition from the Internet and other sources has forced Canadian artists and producers to improve. We're producing better content all around but I'm sure the CRTC (which no one in Canada really likes save for big businesses) will take the credit. They'll cite their regulations rather than the extra competition which they've been too slow to prevent.

  • On the post: Big Retailers Pushing Legislation To Harm Online Retailers

    Anshar ( profile ), 27 Feb, 2009 @ 12:43pm

    Re:

    Precicely. They're acting as if stealing and selling stolen goods is a phenomenon new to the online retail age.

  • On the post: Canadian Court Apparently Decides That Private Facebook Profiles Aren't Actually Private

    Anshar ( profile ), 27 Feb, 2009 @ 08:44am

    @Chronno S. Trigger

    I respectfully disagree. I don't think it's like someone bugging my house, it's more like someone getting a warrant to search my house and finding stuff I don't want them to find. Is it an invasion of my privacy? Yes. Do they have the right to invade my privacy in that way? With a warrant - yes. Who's to blame for what they find? I am to blame because I kept the stuff I didn't want found knowing that if the house was searched they'd find it.

  • On the post: Canadian Court Apparently Decides That Private Facebook Profiles Aren't Actually Private

    Anshar ( profile ), 27 Feb, 2009 @ 08:08am

    I have to agree with Anonymous Coward. This seems pretty reasonable. It's true that if you tell someone a secret that you're not necessarily consenting to everyone knowing that secret. It's also true that once you tell someone that secret, you've given up privacy in favour of trust - trust that the person you told won't spread the secret. Likewise, once you give someone permission to view your facebook info you've given up privacy in favour of trusting your 'friends' to not repost your info in a more public place. What you're suggesting in the article is akin to saying that a witness in court can't testify about something he/she was told in confidence by the accused without the accused giving permission.

  • On the post: And Now Facebook And Twitter Will Melt Your Mind

    Anshar ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2009 @ 11:08am

    Re: Ahem.

    Let me see if I've got this straight:
    You start of by calling names.
    Next, you admit that you stopped reading when you came across something with which you disagreed.
    You claim that the article's sources are incorrect without citing any sources of your own to substantiate that claim.
    Instead of proof, you offer only your own point of view.
    Finally you end with profanity.
    From this we are expected to believe that you have a better understanding of empathy and social interaction than the article's author or any of the sources cited by him.
    I have already given your post all due consideration and I put greater stock in the original author's position than I do in yours.

  • On the post: And Now Facebook And Twitter Will Melt Your Mind

    Anshar ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2009 @ 10:40am

    Re: Re: Online socializing worked for me!

    Curses... foiled again. :)

  • On the post: And Now Facebook And Twitter Will Melt Your Mind

    Anshar ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2009 @ 10:16am

    Online socializing worked for me!

    I met my wife online. Not a dating site, just socializing. We've been married for 6 years now and going strong. I'm just saying...

  • On the post: Prosecutors Change Pirate Bay Charges Again; Weak Evidence Exposed

    Anshar ( profile ), 25 Feb, 2009 @ 08:50am

    Re: I'm actually writing a paper on this...

    Liberty McAteer: There is one flaw in your argument that TPB is different from Google that I (as a tech head) would like to address: You suggest that because Google uses spider robots to build the index for it's database it's acceptable. You also suggest that because TPB uses manually uploaded index entries that the situation is different. (Please correct me if I've misinterpreted your remarks.) Did you know that Google, Yahoo! and other mainstream search engines accept manual submissions to their indices? With that in mind, Google (used here as the posterboy for mainstream search engines in general) IS like TPB. Or to be more precise: Google does everything TPB does - it just does other things too.