Roy Wilson 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1093) comment rss

  • On the post: T-Mobile's 'Revolutionary' New TV Service Looks Like The Same Old Crap

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 02:46pm

    Price war FAIL

    "The $100-a-month, in-home TV package will be offered in eight cities, starting with 150 channels, including local broadcasts and regional sports networks"

    I just went through the runaround with Spectrum getting their bottom tier service.

    What I changed from is their package that T-mobile is apparently mirroring.

    I downgraded because Spectrum was raising the price from $65/mo to $83/mo.

    Hard to believe Spectrum offering a lower price when they've got a true monopoly in this region.

    ....shouldn't have said that, now they'll raise my "new" reduced package fifty bucks by the end of the month....

  • On the post: Devin Nunes Admits That His Bogus Defamation Lawsuits Are Really About Phishing For Journalists' Sources

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 13 Apr, 2019 @ 01:22pm

    Re:

    You're completely missing the point. THE CONSTITUTION DOESN'T SAY THAT. You're using Appeal to Authority to justify the opinions of others. They're still nothing but opinions, and while the 49 courts that "agree" with your opinion seem to think it says something, they don't agree on exactly what either. All citizens are supposed to receive equal justice under the law in the US. That also means there's no special class that gets different treatment under the law. Hey, I'm all for a Free Press - they can print anything they want - from Enquirer stories to the Oxford American Dictionary definitions of words. But if a member of the press commits a crime getting that information, which includes "shielding" a source who has committed crimes, they get charged and tried just like anyone who is NOT a member of the press.

  • On the post: Devin Nunes Admits That His Bogus Defamation Lawsuits Are Really About Phishing For Journalists' Sources

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 13 Apr, 2019 @ 10:51am

    Re:

    Doesn't matter if they're the Sermon on the Mount. The Constitution grants no such privilege. And the problem with the Appeal to Authority debate tactic in this particular case is: "As of 2011, 49 states and the District of Columbia offer some form of" ...DIFFERENT opinions on the subject.

  • On the post: Devin Nunes Admits That His Bogus Defamation Lawsuits Are Really About Phishing For Journalists' Sources

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 13 Apr, 2019 @ 09:33am

    Re:

    Wikipedia is not the Constitution. Nor are States adopting different laws "shielding journalists" (do any of them actually define what a "journalist is?) Your "sources" are simply OPINIONS of what someone else BELIEVES is contained in the simple, straight-forward wording of the First Amendment. Nowhere does it have the words "protect" or "sources". Taken to the far extreme, it COULD mean that all members of the press get a Golden Key to access any and all encrypted government information. Even more extreme, that slaves can't be members of the press. Start reading in "emanations of a penumbra" and you can find anything you like in the document - up to it being legal to gas members of religions.

  • On the post: Platform Liability Doesn't — And Shouldn't — Depend On Content Moderation Practices

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 03:31pm

    Re:

    Ummm... you're advocating censorship against "vewpoint discrimination" by anyone not agreeing with whatever that LGBTQxyz? decides is Correct Speech. I prefer the system here on TechDirt. Blue in his/her many incarnations can spew whatever idiocy they want - and the USERS can just click to hide it. Of course, the frequency of his/her idiocy means we each wear out a mouse every month, but I'll pay for the worn-out mouse happily to avoid true censorship here.

  • On the post: Platform Liability Doesn't — And Shouldn't — Depend On Content Moderation Practices

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 01:55pm

    Re: "we don't see evidence" because willfully blind.

    You may want to look up the definition of "palindrome"...

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 11:20am

    Re:

    As I mentioned, charges are filed at the discretion of the District Attorney. A DA can refuse to charge (or prosecute) for any reason from National Security to pure whimsy. The DOJ opted NOT to charge and prosecute over the Pentagon Papers.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 11:17am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    As to complicity through awareness, it's case-dependent. For the purposes of this article, the answer is yes. NDA's are null and void when it comes to illegal acts. Say you run out and buy yourself a cell phone, instantly making yourself a "journalist". You hear a rumor that the government agency I work for is covering up Blue's dumping of Unobtanium in a public water supply. You can't prove any of it, it's just a rumor. If I go to you and say it's all true - but you can't use my name, you could report it as "unconfirmed from a government source on condition of anonymity", and about a third of the US population would take it as unquestionably true. No problem, nothing was stolen, nobody was urged, coerced, etc into a crime. However, IF you insist I get you "the proof" and I steal a copy of the documentation from a Gov't server, YES, you're going to be charged along with me. It doesn't matter if it saves bazillions of minority children, one crime doesn't make up for another crime. The kids are saved, we all go to prison.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:41am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Who decides? The government? The DOJ? A self-appointed "journalist"? Fred the plumber? Yo momma? Maybe the information released IS in the best interests of the country. But if that information was stolen, laws were broken, charges could be filed.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:04am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: no criminal "Act"

    Buildings have been like that for centuries. You hire a Master Carpenter at a zillion dollars an hour. He shows up on-site to read the plans. The actual work is done by a bunch of Apprentices. AKA: KIDS. "Straight, Plumb, Level - pick one" :)

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:00am

    Re:

    One, they're not "scare quotes". I've yet to see a legal definition of a "journalist", so it's an undefined yet over-used "title". Two, if a "journalist" who doesn't break the law... Receipt of stolen goods. Possession of stolen goods. Resale of stolen goods. Accessory before/after the fact. You're trying to claim a difference between stolen data and stolen money (or watches). In the eyes of the Law, there is no difference.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 07:40am

    Re:

    You've just equated a "journalist" with a petty "fence". One thing that I haven't seen come up - criminal charges are prosecuted at the discretion of the District Attorney. Which, YES, means that a lot of charges will never be filed. THESE charges would likely never have been filed if they hadn't attempted to hack a CIA system.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 07:07am

    Re: Re: no criminal "Act"

    They're being filed, charged, and prosecuted under US Law. You may as well comment that the Code of Hammurabi has no specific Murder charge in it. Because it has as much bearing on this as whatever western continental European legal codes have on it - NONE.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 07:04am

    Re:

    Conspiracy laws have been around a looooong time. That YOUR particular ox is being gored on this one doesn't change that. Assange crossed a line when he conspired with Manning to illegally access a government system. There's a good explanation of the various charges that can be filed floating around using a pair of stoners in the vein of Cheech & Chong. "Cops are here, flush the weed" - Conspiracy. YES, people conspire all the time legally. Once they "legally" conspire to commit an illegal act, a charge of Conspiracy can be filed, and if there's actual evidence of such, they'll probably be convicted. A "journalist" attempting to get a "source" to commit a crime by disclosing or obtaining information for them in an illegal manner is guilty of Conspiracy.

  • On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 06:38am

    Re:

    Well put. If Manning had succeeded in cracking the password, Assange wouldn't be hit with Conspiracy charges alone, but also as an Accessory before the fact for supplying the hash. The Conspiracy charge will stick if it makes it to court - the two of them conspired to breach a secure government system. That "journalists" "do this all the time" is either an indictment of the "journalist" community if they really DO conspire to break laws, or a heaping spoon of hyperbole. I see "protect sources" and other "journalist rights" mentioned. Those "rights" don't exist. Never did. Nor do "journalists" have some sort of special right to induce, coerce, or bribe "sources" to illegally disclose information to them.

  • On the post: Devin Nunes Admits That His Bogus Defamation Lawsuits Are Really About Phishing For Journalists' Sources

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 12:50pm

    wow...

    ...what a reaction.

    He said outright he wants it to get to Discovery so he gets sources.

    It's a MOLE HUNT. He's using currently legal methods to uncover a turncoat.

    As to First Amendment issues, once again, please show me where it actually says that "journalists" can "protect sources".

  • On the post: Nancy Pelosi Joins Ted Cruz And Louis Gohmert In Attacking CDA 230

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:50am

    Think about this....

    "Facebook and Google, because it will be way too risky on the liability side. Facebook and Google can afford the fight."

    ...the more the giants spend on lawyers and paying fines, the lower their taxable income is at the end of each quarter...

    Even Pelosi doesn't want that...

  • On the post: FBI Cyber Crimes Division Not So Great About Passing Info To Victims Of Cyberattacks

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 11 Apr, 2019 @ 01:04pm

    Re:

    You're missing the attitude that so endears the FBI to... well... the rest of the planet... Average person: "Would you like fries with that?" FBI Agent: "Why do you want to know?"

  • On the post: House Passes Net Neutrality Bill, McConnell Promises It Won't Survive Senate

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 11 Apr, 2019 @ 12:28pm

    Re: "Dead in the water"

    Be fair, now. If there wasn't a deciding vote on what gets to the floor, EVERY pipe-dream bit of idiocy would require a floor vote, meaning NOTHING would get done. Hey! Wait a minute.... /s for the humor impaired

  • On the post: House Passes Net Neutrality Bill, McConnell Promises It Won't Survive Senate

    Roy Wilson ( profile ), 11 Apr, 2019 @ 12:26pm

    Re:

    McConnell, Pelosi, Boxer, Schumer, the list goes on. They've been in power long enough to know where damned near ALL the bodies are buried. Makes it next to impossible to get rid of them. Term limits of say... dunno, three, maybe four terms would fix that problem. Of course, the dinosaurs are the ones who would have to vote it into law, so....

Next >>