Ehud Gavron’s Techdirt Profile

gavron

About Ehud GavronTechdirt Insider




Ehud Gavron’s Comments comment rss

  • Jun 30th, 2015 @ 5:02am

    Walter O'Brien Is a fraud

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud.

    This article is not about the show.

    It has nothing to do with licensing, some idiot's brain being on high (or being high), homeland "security" arresting him, or other make believe things.

    If you're wanting to discuss the TV show, there are plenty of make believe places to go do that. This is not one of them.

    The article is about the fraud of a man, not the show. He doesn't work with other countries to solve anything. He's a fraud. I know it's difficult to comprehend... here's the big reveal... READ THE ARTICLE UP AT THE TOP!

    E

  • Jun 23rd, 2015 @ 7:30am

    typo

    palirament --> parliament

  • Jun 22nd, 2015 @ 7:03pm

    Walter O'Brien Is a fraud

    I love Adam. He was awesome on FireFly and he's great on The Last Ship. Heck, if you've been around you know he rocked it on Next Of Kin. (Patrick Swayze, may he rest in peace).

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. He has nothing to do with Adam (Baldwin or otherwise, although Baldwin is impressive!) This discussion is not about the TV show or the nonexistent scorpio character so guess-what... there is no such in this world.

    Sometimes you have to take the head out of the sand to see the only sightless moron you're fighting... is you.

    Best to you,

    Ehud

  • Jun 22nd, 2015 @ 3:00am

    Piracy

    Only IP lawyers and shakedown organizations engage in piracy.

    Everyone else is just a sailor on the waters of information.

  • Jun 20th, 2015 @ 8:54am

    AUSA impropriety - who's going to charge him with a crime?

    Niemoller...
    "Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me."

    This is the US DoJ and AUSA Velamoor overreaching US Constitutional law about
    - freedom of speech
    - prior restraint
    and CDA wrt
    - Reason.com not being responsible for the content
    and finally
    - threats to reason.com for violating an order not in place at the time

    WHO WILL SPEAK FOR THESE PEOPLE NOW? Because if you don't get the gist of the topic, ALREADY people are being silenced before they CAN speak for others or themselves.

    This gross overreach isn't a one-time thing (the Techdirt article is instructive on the grand jury abuse) and the AUSA running it [because judge dissed] needs to be sent back to repeat law school.

    E

  • Jun 9th, 2015 @ 10:50am

    MITM attacks

    It is everyone's ethical duty and responsibility to expose MITM attacks. This is one such.

    For anyone to threaten a criminal prosecution and worse yet to have the legal basis to do so...

    Is beneath disgusting.

    E

  • Jun 9th, 2015 @ 7:51am

    It's not about the TV show

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. His made up credentials is one of the reasons he and his company are hired, but they are purely false.

    The article is about Walter O'Brien, the MAN. There is no discussion here about the TV show or its contents. It may be good or bad, realistic or not, futuristic or modern, but whatever it is IT IS NOT THE SUBJECT OF THE ARTICLE.

    We do not care about "holes in the story OF THE TV PLOT" only holes in the story that Walter O'Brien tells.

    It's very narcissistic to come into a forum and without reading any of it -- or the original article -- plop down a steaming nugget of soft opinion on the show plot. Really don't do that in other people's living rooms. Leave your shit in your own outhouse.

  • May 30th, 2015 @ 9:59am

    Rand Paul "will not allow"...

    Perhaps my fellow readers forget. When the majority leaders wants to prevent his peer from speaking, none shall speak. When he wants to prevent legislation from passing, none shall pass. This even if committee has blessed it in full.

    Rand Paul can speak because strawman.

    Section 215 will be reauthorized. Not because it's lawful (2nd circuit decision). Not because it was approved by the House. Because that is how the hand that strokes the other hand is rewarded.

    So we have all day today (Saturday) and most of tomorrow (Sunday) to SPECULATE on "Oh wouldn't it be nice if..." but then they'll reauthorize the USA PATRIOT ACT's sunset sections (including 215) and there will be POMPOUS AGGRANDIZING speeches about how this is IMPORTANT AND VITAL for our SECURITY.

    Except we read techdirt and know that none of this ever contributed to security or prevented any terrorist event. It just takes away our rights and gives money to assholes. I hope you don't mind my one frank word here. Please withhold judgment for 36 hours... by which time you'll either think I'm an idiot and have no faith in our elected "leaders"... or you'll be wanting to use similar language.

    Ehud

  • May 28th, 2015 @ 9:52am

    typo

    "it's cargo hold" --> "its cargo hold"

    Cheers

    E

  • May 27th, 2015 @ 6:44am

    Techdirt is the truffle-pig of the masses

    You missed on this one.

    They will reauthorize the section 215 collection.
    - yes regardless of whether one district court said it was unlawful
    - yes to prevent the sunset clause
    - yes ignoring all the so-called alternatives

    To start a sentence with a conjunction:
    And when they do, you will realize how naive you've been and you'll blanche. Because that's how far we've fallen.

    Four more days.

    E

  • May 18th, 2015 @ 8:57am

    "Get a life"

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. The things he claims - the basis on which he is hired - are not true and could not be true.

    Dear Marie, your bull in a China shop approach to telling an entire forum of readers and hundreds of comments later to "get a life" is only as tone-deaf as William Shatner at a Star Trek convention.

    The article is about the man, not the show. The discussion on this thread (absent illiterate narcissists like yourself who couldn't be bothered to actually read the article) is about the man, not the show.

    While I appreciate that in the world of your own mind you can barge bull-in-a-China-shop style into anyone's living room anywhere and tell them what to do, fortunately your right to free expression only subjects you to ridicule here.

    So "everyone who disagrees with me is a cynic" and "you all need love" and "leave him the hell alone" and "get a life" are a good way to let us know you're a mistreated bullied small child.

    Work on your own failed relationships on your own time and place.


    Best,

    E

  • May 6th, 2015 @ 4:42am

    Typo/Freudian slip?

    "while taking away frights from citizens"

    Frights --> Rights, although that's quite a Freudian slip,
    adding frights to citizens.

    E

  • May 4th, 2015 @ 10:15pm

    "Trade" "Mark"

    Normally TD is really good about showing the different marks and how there's no opportunity for confusion. This article did not include that.

    Normally TD is really good about showing how one company's trade is different than the other's. Here they both talk about transportation but it's unlikely the olive-oil aussies will be going into space, launching an airline, or pretending they are real-blonde real-white-teeth 50-year old billionaires.

    Normally TD does the research so when group B says "We agreed on all but one thing" we know what that one thing is so we can say "Mr. Branson's lawyers... how could you?" Yet, here... none of that.

    More facts would be helpful to get a mass of support for the conclusions arrayed here...

  • May 2nd, 2015 @ 5:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: How to register a domain name...

    > I think you missed... "Started a business with a dot com name."

    I think in your haste to prove everyone wrong, you missed actually reading what other people wrote before you.

    As in when I wrote entry 268.

    But it's ok. Everyone should all read YOUR posts but you can't be bothered to read everyone else's.

    Ehud

  • May 2nd, 2015 @ 7:05am

    Re: Re: How to register a domain name...

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. He tells fanciful tales and his company trades on that.

    However, the first dot com was not 1994 lol.

    Some examples to point out that's off by a decade:
    Domain Name: bbn.com
    Creation Date: 1985-04-24T00:00:00-0800

    Domain Name: ibm.com
    Creation Date: 1986-03-19 00:00:00 -0500

    Have a happy day,

    E

  • Apr 29th, 2015 @ 10:19pm

    800 baud x2

    Rabbit hole...

    No, it's not possible he used a 1200 baud MODEM and got 800 baud. Back then (2400 baud and below) there was no memory in the MODEM except for a few bytes and no buffering.

    You had to set the serial-port speed the same as the communication channel because of that lack of buffering.

    He never had an 800 baud (or 800 bps) MODEM. Ever. He lied. That's ok though but the problem is when you lie the credibility for the rest of the illiterate rant is reduced...

    time for me to head out.

    Cheers!

    E

  • Apr 29th, 2015 @ 7:56pm

    800 baud modem

    You didn't use an 800 baud MODEM for accessing BBS's[sic].*

    This doesn't give kickstarters a bad name. Kickstarters are not an investment. They're a gamble. If you win then you get a late product at a discount before it's available for retail. If you lose you get nothing. If you wait you can buy it retail -- with guarantees.

    E
    * No telephone MODEMS manufactured ever did 800 baud.

  • Apr 29th, 2015 @ 6:41pm

    1200 baud MODEMs.

    Who would accuse a lawyer of lying? I would.

    He didn't use the Internet since the "1200 baud modems[sic] days". Not even a tiny bit.

    The "Internet" has evolved many times but commercial access was available in 1993. Prior to that, if you were related to the NSFnet, its educational institutions, or the technology that made it run you could have accessed it as early as 1986.

    In 1986 v32 was the standard (9600bps) and it would have been extremely rare to see someone using 1200 baud. 9600bps was exepsnsive. 4800 baud was the price point. 2400 baud was cheap. 1200 baud was obsolete. Nobody used that on "the Internet". Maybe CompuServe or Delphi or AOL.

    Just adding some technical facts here. This pyramid scheme is unravelling, but not fast enough to keep the money out of this scammer's hands.

    Ehud
    P.S. Mr. Cliffts: I intend this posting to be indicating that you are a liar, engage in defrauding those who put money in your hands and did not get a product and that you're incompetent as a lawyer. I live in Tucson Arizona. Come get some Arizona justice. I'll waive service if you serve me with a complaint that is neither materially deficient, misstates the law, has no US English grammar nor spelling mistakes, and is printed on 25lb paper.

  • Apr 29th, 2015 @ 1:51pm

    Freedom of speech

    "If you're defending the enablers of infringement, then you're a pirate."

    If you're defending someone you're exercising your right to freedom of speech.

    Those would would remove our right because "someone copied a file" are the threat to free speech, free expression, and freedom in general.

    E

  • Apr 29th, 2015 @ 12:19pm

    Madman Masnick

    Mike's* generally well-reasoned but let's stick to the facts.

    This is a horrible ruling and if it were here in the US it would set a horrible precedent.

    Ehud
    *Well I'm personally butthurt he turned down my offer to go do coffee or whatever for that offer they have in the techdirt store where you get a 30 minute face-to-face with him. I wasn't even going to bring a macaroni-picture for him to sign. However, the reason I originally expressed an interest in the meeting [which was unrequited and I cried for hours --maybe days] was because Mike puts things together. Anyone can analyze a ruling or write a story. It takes knowledge of the context to frame it in a way that expresses WHY and HOW it is important. Still... the story is not about Mike. It's about the judge's ruling. Right?

More comments from Ehud Gavron >>