Bloomman’s Techdirt Profile


About Bloomman

Bloomman’s Comments comment rss

  • Jul 11th, 2015 @ 4:21pm

    And if they did it to themselves?

    Considering this entire game is designed as a publicity stunt to raise money for charity, NOT getting a takedown would have been a bit of a failure. We should at least consider they expected Rockstar to do this, and when they did not, they did it to themselves.

    It took a game with a pretty limited appeal and got them back in the press. I always like to ask the question, who benefited from this?
  • Jun 5th, 2012 @ 5:04pm

    I didn't even know (or care)

    But now, not only do I know that this lover boy chugs the Labatt's, but that also Labatts is worried about it. Should I be worried about it? Am I gonna go Labatt sh*t crazy!?
  • Jan 9th, 2012 @ 4:16pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Medicare

    Some guy some where said a good idea on a forum post, yeesh, don't you see that problems been solved???

    But seriously, brilliant fixes on the forums aside, I don't pretend to know how to fix this. I do know that saying the government getting out of the healthcare business will *raise* prices is silly. Find one instance where government stepped aside and prices went up and you'll have your case for more regulation.

    As to paying for a system at 39 that you won't see if they *gut* it... Imagine how some people feel about paying for public school when they went to a private one. How about someone who's never abused drugs paying taxes that go to treatment! That would all fall under betterment of society cost. So would be medicare payments as the system was phased to a stable one.

    Since I switched to an HSA I spend less on healthcare then ever and use it more! Now, when I need an xray (as my daughter did last week), I call a couple imaging places and let them know I'm shopping around. After 3 calls, I found someone willing to do it for half the price of the other 2. Sold. My total cost was less than what I'd have payed in co-pays and monthly premium and my insurance got billed $0 so there's no one getting screwed. When you tell someone you can pay up to $300, they'll charge $300. If you tell someone you are shopping for a deal, they will charge a fair price. You can't assume people are inherently going to try to help you at their own expense.
  • Jan 26th, 2011 @ 8:13pm

    Sarcasm aside

    I have to admit, this is quite literally a monetization of their music. Whether a t-shirt or a head mounted display, for the purchaser, it's an opportunity to connect with the artist and in that same light, an opportunity for the artist to Connect with Fans. Don't hate Mike!
  • Dec 1st, 2010 @ 11:31am

    Complaining is fine, but how about a solution?

    I personally have no issue with the scanners or pat downs, that said, I think the process needs to be vetted for effectiveness. At the same time, it seems unfair to say "'s happening with little evidence that the reasons given make much sense." I think between the underwear bomber and shoe bomber it's safe to assume there is cause to examine the scanners as an option. In the end, the person trying to bomb us will keep looking to find the place we're not protecting so common sense says eventually, we'd have to look everywhere in order to ensure safety. I would like to see an alternative proposed where we can still prevent the underwear bomb and maintain the privacy. An effective alternative would change minds.
  • Nov 9th, 2010 @ 9:02pm

    Free market

    Information is available through too many pipes now Greevar. The more companies like Comcast try to force us down a pipe, the more consumers will gravitate to other options. It's beyond the control of any one entity, it's about the ability to convey your message now, not how you control your oppositions ability to disseminate.
  • Jun 2nd, 2010 @ 9:52pm

    (untitled comment)

    I agree that we need to stand up against intrusive disclosure laws. I don't think making the Hollywood argument will change minds as the counter will always be "watch the credits".

    The focus should remain on the logic of we live in a world where "buyer beware" is accepted and encouraged. This is not a negative as a quality product will *generally* win out over savvy marketing. As we move towards a more connected world it becomes harder and harder to pass a crummy product off onto the marketplace. Five years ago if you told me half my purchases would be based on the ratings of perfect strangers, I would have said you were crazy! Yet I find I hit the 4 star filter on Amazon 90% of the time.

    If my son runs a lawn mowing business and has mowed my lawn with precision for 10 years, am I wrong to give him a 5 star on Google? Do I need to write "*WARNING* I'm his Father so you should take that into consideration" or face being fined? What about saying I'm a Fan on Facebook? Is there even a place to disclose that within the Facebook system?

    Forget the internet. Let's say I'm putting one of those cardboard signs on the lawn that says "Mowed by Smith's Mowing". Should I be required to put up a second sign disclosing my relationship with the owner?

    And how far do these disclosure rules reach? Sure family is an easy target but what about friends? My wifes co-workers? What about the girl I buy coffee from? My son mows her parents lawn. Now when they put up a nice comment on the mowing companies Google profile, was it because they do good work or because I tipped their daughter a buck? Money changed hands! Disclose it or else....

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it