Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (60) comment rss

  • On the post: Google Is Your Friend, Unless You're A Dumb Criminal; Then It's Your Downfall

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 31 Oct, 2013 @ 08:41pm

    To be fair...

    ...the search history wasn't that big a deal evidence-wise; what with the money, clothing, drugs... I'm sure the cops appreciated the bonus laughs, though.

    But if you're googling how to rob the bank, you're probably in the wrong line of work.

  • On the post: Infamous Viral 'Goblin Toppler' Video Taken Down In Copyright Claim

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 24 Oct, 2013 @ 09:03am

    He used the wrong defense

    Instead of claiming he did it for "safety", fat boy should have said he simply leaned against the rock to catch his breath and the poor punky little boulder couldn't resist his mass.

    I'd have believed it. Well... sooner than I'd have believed the "safety" line of bull.

  • On the post: ATF Humor: Whistleblowers Facing A Firing Squad

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 18 Oct, 2013 @ 03:25am

    With the ATF, it's a fine line between humor and murder.

    Cool. The ATF can recycle their old "n----r hunting licenses". A little white-out, type in "whistleblower" and they'll be good to go.

    But I'm sure that's just a humorous exaggeration. Really, they'll only     stomp to death any kittens belonging to whistleblowers.

  • On the post: PATRIOT Act Author Says James Clapper Should Be Fired And Prosecuted; Plans Law To Stop NSA Overreach

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 11 Oct, 2013 @ 05:57am

    Re:

    I'm in favor of restraining Congress, too. Preferably with straitjackets and Haldol.

  • On the post: Gen. Alexander Offers To Store Phone Metadata At A 'Neutral Site' To Alleviate Concerns About The NSA's Spying

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 11 Oct, 2013 @ 04:31am

    Making a virtue of necessity?

    "The National Security Agency?s director said Tuesday he is open to storing telephone records in a neutral ?repository? to alleviate concerns about government snooping."

    Translation: "Our own data center keeps catching fire, so how 'bout we use someone else's servers?"

  • On the post: Adam Steinbaugh's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2013 @ 05:21pm

    Re: Re: Re: Techdirt's NSA bump now definitely over.

    I am aware of that. It seemed to double our chances that we wouldn't hear from him again. One way or another. [grin]

  • On the post: Adam Steinbaugh's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2013 @ 01:50pm

    Re: Techdirt's NSA bump now definitely over.

    ootb, you have a solution to the "problem" of people here not wanting to read your incessant, off-topic whining about Techdirt and its policies: http://www.blogger.com/home

    Get your own blog and dissemble there.

    Censorship is preventing a person from speaking (or writing, etc.). But free speech rights don't include the right to use someone else's soap box. Get your own blog.

    People saying that you aren't worth listening to isn't censorship. And if other people want to read your drivel here, they can always "click here" to show comments. You aren't even being relegated to a "free speech zone"; we're just ignoring you like we would any other shizophrenic street nut who has long since ceased to be amusing.

    But prove us all wrong. Prove the world wants to read your posts. GET YOUR OWN BLOG. It's free. It's easy (even you could figure it out). You have access to blog stats to prove how more popular you are than Techdirt.

    So do it. But stop your whining here. I've babysat two year-olds who whined less about getting want they want.

  • On the post: DailyDirt: Biomimicry In Space

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2013 @ 07:35pm

    Ah, NASA... Still on the cutting edge of decades-old concepts.

    "SpiderFab, for cryin' out loud. I think O'Neill's people dreamed up a beam extruding space station-assembling robot (similar to how custom rain gutters are fabricated onsite) back in the '70s or '80s. Seems like they even built a proof of concept prototype. Maybe NASA should check their files.

    Or read a little science fiction. As I recall, the concept showed up as "shelobs" in the Niven et al novel Falling Angels in '91-- just 22 years ago. At this rate, NASA might even come up with the idea of habitats and craft constructed of high tensile strength fabric and inflated with expanding foam (and carved out to create living and working space) in another 10-20 years. I know that idea showed up in SF in the mid '90s, and again in my own novel Net Assets a decade ago (before Bigelow's inflatable "space hotel") (Fee download - http://www.bussjaeger.org/index.html#netassets).

  • On the post: Court Fines Patch Editor $300 Per Day For Not Revealing Sources

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2013 @ 08:29pm

    Re: Re: Re: SO, you'd rather someone be convicted of murder!

    Sheesh. You can't get it right even after quoting: "the confidential source of the police reports" -- You wrote: "It was just the police reports." -- You are simply wrong that it was the reports and not NAME of the source manifestly NOT available to defense.

    I realize you have trouble keeping up with the real world, but please refer to my original comment again. I said that that what Patch published was information from the police reports; I did not say that was what the current hearing was trying to learn, because that was the point of the post on the hearing and fines.

    Try to keep up. The court (and defense) does not need the confidential source's name because nothing that Patch published affected the investigation and grand jury proceedings (adversely or otherwise), according to the article.

    Again, try to keep up. You are the one who suggested that Patch had other information: "And if a defendant can plausibly show that the reporter has information that'll help clear him, then the reporter is morally obligated to produce it".

    The patch reporter reported information already known to the police. Since the defense team obviously knows about this current proceeding, it seems obvious they know what Patch published (and should have gotten that through disclosure as well; if they didn't that is another issue unrelated to Patch). Nothing demonstrates knowledge of the crime above and beyond what the defense has. At most, they are on a fishing expedition, hoping to delay final conviction and sentencing. This case seems to be the very poster child for the state's shield law- there is no apparent reason that forcing revelation of the source's identity serves justice and the public interest.

    But... congratulations. This is the longest you've stayed on topic since I noticed your bizarre rants on Techdirt.

  • On the post: Court Fines Patch Editor $300 Per Day For Not Revealing Sources

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2013 @ 05:13pm

    Re: SO, you'd rather someone be convicted of murder!

    Blue-boy: "LEFT OUT NINE-TENTHS of the story"

    Looks like that's what you did.

    "Kinney ruled in August that Hosey had to turn over the confidential source of the police reports ..."


    It was just the police reports. Not other incriminating (or otherwise) information unavailable to the authorities or defense team.

    "Will County Assistant State?s Attorney Marie Czech said during the hearing that the grand jury proceedings in the Hickory Street murder cases were not compromised by Hosey?s articles, nor was evidence compromised."


    Just police reports that did not compromise the investigation or grand jury proceedings. So Patch informed the public without affecting the case. Sounds like decent journalism to me, thoroughly protected by the First Amendment.

    And from there, you proceed to hop on your usual ranting hobby horse about things completely unrelated to this post. Dude, I generally read all comments, including yours, because -- usually -- comments add valuable elements to a basic post. But roughly 99.9999% of your comments turn out to be worse than useless, and I click the report button to save other people the trouble of scrolling past you.

    I'm just going to skip the first part, and go straight to downchecking your bilge waste. If you want to rant about Masnick et al, why not get your own blog and do it there? That way, folks (if any) who want to read your timewasters, can go straight to the source, without wasting time here. And you'll have control of the comments so you won't have to whine that you're being censored.

    You don't need to STFU; you just need to go buy your own soapbox... SOME. WHERE. ELSE. Please.

  • On the post: Charles Carreon Finally Drops Appeal, Admits Whole Thing Was Dumb… But Still Blaming Pretty Much Everyone Else

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 20 Sep, 2013 @ 11:43am

    Buddhist? Perhaps in the same way that Aaron Alexis was a Buddhist.

  • On the post: Oakland's City Wide Surveillance Network Being Built By Contractor With A History Of Fraud And Little Regard For Civil Liberties

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2013 @ 06:24am

    Could be worse

    Look on the bright side: Just imagine the rights abuses Oakland could inflict if they went about surveilling free people efficiently and cost-effectively.

  • On the post: The US Government Has Betrayed The Internet; It's Time To Fix That Now

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 05 Sep, 2013 @ 06:19pm

    Re: Re: Requires a moral and legal fix, NOT more technical.

    "I think that Google should change it's motto from "don't be evil" to "don't be completely evil". That would be more honest about all they do."


    Actually, it's now "Don't get caught." And they're about as good at that as they were the the not-evil bit.

  • On the post: The CIA Says Many Of Its Applicants Have Ties To Terrorist Organizations — And That's Just The Ones The Vetting Process Catches

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 03 Sep, 2013 @ 09:44am

    What constitutes a "terrorist tie"? If they're using the NSA "3 hops" definition, that's most of America.

    Strictly speaking, according to that statement, it isn't 20% of applicants with terrorist ties. It's 20% of applicants who failed the background check. Without know what percentage failed checks, we don't know the overall percentage.

  • On the post: Once Again, Will People Say That Reporters Revealing Details Of US Intelligence On Syria Be Called Criminals?

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 30 Aug, 2013 @ 11:28am

    Re: How do you know the leak was unauthorized?

    Just a WAG: no official release from the the WH spokesidiot, an anonymous "US official", no official confirmation...

    True, there's really unauthorized (Snowden) versus "unauthorized" (conveniently timely unattributed propaganda -wink, wink, nudge, nudge-).

  • On the post: Declassified FISA Court Opinion Shows NSA Lied Repeatedly To The Court As Well

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 21 Aug, 2013 @ 09:37pm

    "Oversight", "overlook"... close enough for government work.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 21 Jul, 2013 @ 08:45pm

    RE: "A Theory on the Seeming Ubuiquity of Bad Lawyering"

    Huh. I attributed it to improved quality control in the illicit drug industry.

  • On the post: Prenda Fails To Pay Filing Fee For Appeal, Now Owes $9,425 In Legal Fees

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 11 Jul, 2013 @ 09:26pm

    Re: Re: Has anyone checked to see if any of these guys are still in the country?

    Bookmarked. Danke.

  • On the post: Prenda Fails To Pay Filing Fee For Appeal, Now Owes $9,425 In Legal Fees

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 11 Jul, 2013 @ 08:28pm

    Has anyone checked to see if any of these guys are still in the country?

    Are they just stalling via email while they go into hiding?

  • On the post: Righthaven Copyrights 'Sold' Back To Stephens Media For $80k To Pay Legal Fees

    Carl "Bear" Bussjaeger ( profile ), 18 Mar, 2013 @ 08:08am

    Righthaven brought this upon themselves in so many stupid ways. I happen to know that they were offered actual, complete, unencumbered copyrights to works that were (and still are; by iTunes and B&N, no less) being infringed for profit, not just reposting by bloggers. They should have jumped at that offer for the opportunity to at least appear to be working in good faith.