..."Thomas Goolnik" is the very first entry in the EU Upload Filter file...
"Again, it remains entirely possible that Trump simply wanted the deal spiked out of spite for CNN."
Those of us who have watched trump's antics over the last forty or so years know two true things about the man: He's PETTY and he's SPITEFUL.
As Jackie Gleason said; "Being rich means never having to say you're sorry.". Trump takes that to heart.
Burning a merger because someone involved in it pissed him off in the past isn't out of character.
Disagree. As the article points out, there's an election a month away. Block them NOW for a few days, and see how that influences the coming election. They can't claim the big baddie US is the bad guy when it's laws THEY (the current office holders) passed that built the fence.
His page exists at 127.0.0.1
Agreed, the "swarm" would have to be one seed and one leech, the leech being the person getting arrested. Even if it was a honeypot, they couldn't get the hash from the leech until the file was completely downloaded. But what they're claiming is that they can see inside the leech's machine to get the hash of the .bt torrent file itself. That's a hell of a lot more invasive (and illegal....) than firing up their own client and joining the swarm. Does anyone still download torrent files? The Magnet Link system does away with that for this very reason.
Blaming the platform is nothing new. Some idiot says something stupid on TV, and who gets fined? It's not the ignorant idiot who said it, it's the TV show / station / network. The internet platforms fight against falling under Common Carrier status (which is what sane people DO want - a dumb pipe), then scream when they're sued in a case where Common Carrier status would have protected them - like the US Mail or pre-internet Ma Bell. As to all your "half the world" mentions, that won't ever change. Get any two random people together and they'll judge each other.
That's because thorazine isn't a hormone...
Use of scanning software to look for hashes was the main reason for "magnet links" that pretty much every BT site now uses. There is NO torrent file downloaded to any machine in the swarm.
If the entire system is based on the hash value of a given file, software to inject a few "invisible" characters at a random point in any file to change the hash value is already available.
...a big one. He's assuming all the video is in English.
You're not going to get multi-lingual reviewers for minimum wage.
This clown needs to see the team involved in a "live" (ten to thirty second transmission delay) TV broadcast.
Be careful with that. I get a few notices on two email addresses every other month or so. I don't HAVE any videos on youtube. They're obvious phishing emails, loaded with links to "appeal" their "decision under the DMCA laws".
Gotta disagree. They passed their laws knowing that their populations were against those laws. They're counting on people (such as you seem to be) not taking direct action, such as geoblocking. If they don't get blocked, the narrative will be "See? The sky isn't falling! Re-elect us!". If France is 1/10th as Facebook addicted as the US seems to be, a week-long geoblock with redirection to a "Illegal from your location" page should be enough to force a "motion" to "repeal" the law(s). While allowing the culprits to save some face by blaming it all on the E-Vile Corporations in the E-Vile United States. As to "only Google and Facebook can afford to...." Maybe they can. I really doubt it, the requirements of the Nerd Harder law just aren't obtainable - you're not going to see "one hour takedown" on a system with billions of users. And you've got to consider if those companies WANT to be there - spend billions to almost comply, and get fined billions more because compliance is impossible isn't a healthy business model.
He's a politician. Don't assume they can do higher maths...
$30,000 per prisoner? We need more private prisons. I live in prison country, and the medium security ones claim $50-60K/y per, the Max and Supermax ones three to five times that much.
Eh, I didn't see it as anything other than current take on what used to be s/he or (s)he when unsure of the gender of a person. And I have to admit, I did find the "zis and zat" mildly amusing.
Not just screeners, but the name of the reviewer they were sent to is a subtitle on every frame. And some Russian online gambling site loaded them with adverts as well. They're not going to lose anything from these leaks.
The songs aren't bad. That they're sometimes performed by people who sing even worse than I do is another matter entirely. Especially all the white covers, the Crewcuts come right to mind. Frankie Lymon's voice wasn't all that great, everything by the Chiffons is a good listen. The really early stuff like Earth Angel, and the very late songs like Dimucci have been popular through what, three, four generations now? 70's hard rock and punk are still popular, 80's disco is well, alright, ONE song on rare occasions for nostalgia purposes, 90's ... nope, can't think of anything really good from then. There are a gem or three from every genre, Maroon 5's Wake Up Call is the most kick-ass Foxtrot since Crocodile Rock brought back Single Swing. :)
...So, Blue's a Steam user....
/s
90's era was a different genre than today's. Or the 70's, 50's, etc. You can't compare the "greatness" between them with any real meaning. Exception: There is no such thing as bad doo-wop...
I don't see why...
...a platform should be held to any different standard of "hate speech" than individuals are.
So long as you don't incite violence or support violence against any "protected group", you should be able to post any damned foolishness you want.
If I start a blog with a comments section for People Who Hate Elbonians, monitor the comments for the above "violence", who really cares?
For every white "supremacist" site you can find a similar site for just about any non-white group you can think of.
So what? It comes down to the Nuke the Gay Whales argument. If YOU find something objectionable, what gives YOUR opinion higher status than that of the person who posted the objectionable (to YOU) content?
The narrow minded should be as free to congregate and discuss non-mainstream ideas and ideals as the broader minded.
Hell, the guy who runs the crew I use to paint my apartments between tenants is the most racist person I've ever met. He's black and only hires black laborers because he claims you can't get any REAL work out of white guys.
I shake my head and pay his invoices because he runs the best small paint crew for miles around. His opinion of white workers doesn't effect the quality of his work (hell, maybe he's RIGHT), and doesn't impact me in any other way.
I don't base who I rent to on race, religion, or anything other than their ability to pay the rent and they pass both a criminal and a financial background check. Why WOULD I? Pick a group, any group, and explain to me why their money isn't as good as that of those outside of that group.