John85851’s Techdirt Profile

john85851

About John85851




John85851’s Comments comment rss

  • Mar 16th, 2017 @ 10:33am

    Why not all Muslim countries?

    If you think it's right to ban all Muslims from entering the country, consider this:

    - Somalia is on the list of banned countries. When has a Somali nationalist ever done anything in the US?

    - Saudi Arabia is not on the list, even though most of the 9/11 hijackers came from that country.
    Could it be because Trump has hotels in Riyadh and Mecca?

    - Egypt is not on the list, even though the country has been unstable for a while.
    Could it be because Trump has hotels in Cairo?

    - Indonesia is not on the list even though they have a huge Mulsim population.
    Could it be because Trump has hotels in Jakarta and Bali? Or is it because these people are Asian and not Middle-Eastern?

    So why not apply the ban to all Muslim countries?

  • Mar 13th, 2017 @ 10:24am

    I don't know if this is a good idea

    I'm not sure I'd want to take a multiple-choice test every time I wanted to comment on an article. I think it could get old very fast.

    I forget where I read it, but one commenting system (maybe Disqus) came up with a system where people would flag abusive and troll comments. If the comment got enough flags, it wouldn't show up in the discussion.
    Okay, sure, most commenting systems work that way, but the revolutionary part was that the comment still visible to only the troll. Then if he got enough downvotes, his entire account would be flagged a s troll... but he would still be allowed to post comments.

    And since the troll would think his comments were still being posted, he wouldn't complain that he was being "censored"- instead, it would look like people were simply ignoring him. After a while of getting no responses, he'd give up and move on to another website where he'd get attention.

  • Mar 13th, 2017 @ 10:15am

    Re: Re: Said it before...

    The obvious answer is D. My opponent said another answer, which obviously means he's a traitor and shouldn't be elected since he doesn't believe America is the best.

    That was sarcasm by the way. ;)

  • Mar 13th, 2017 @ 10:06am

    Is there any conesquences?

    Okay, sure, the officers might get a slap on the wrist or a write-up from the supervisor, but that's not punishment.
    And sure, the guy might sue, but the lawsuit will be covered by the police union. If the guy wins, the payment will be covered by tax-payer money.

  • Mar 8th, 2017 @ 11:11am

    Most people are sheep

    The problem is that most people are sheep and will do what they're told.

    Most people tend to fly a few times a year. What this means is that the typical traveller won't protest being fondled once or twice if the alternative is to miss the flight and not make it home on time.

    Then the frequent fliers can get something like PreCheck to avoid the groping, which means they have nothing to complain about.

    This makes a large-scale protest very difficult.

  • Mar 6th, 2017 @ 3:45pm

    Re: Re:

    _How often do you see it happen in your daily commute?_
    The main reason for running red lights is that the timing is way too short.
    I used to work in an office off a major road. The traffic light would be green for the side road, but would only stay green long enough to let 3 or 4 cars through the intersection. Then the light would be red for 5 minutes, then turn green again to only let 3 cars through.
    Now imagine all the people leaving the office at once and this light has 10-15 cars backed up. If you're the 15th car in line, you're looking at 5 sets of 3 cars at 5 minutes... or about 25 minutes simply waiting for that one light to turn green!

  • Mar 6th, 2017 @ 10:13am

    Interview the lawyers

    I have a suggestion for Tim and Mike: whenever they write stories like this, could they also interview the lawyers and ask why the case was filed.

    I know I sound like a broken record on this issue, but I think it's time we started hearing from the lawyers: did they file the case not knowing about parody laws? Or did they know the law and file the case because their client paid them?

  • Feb 24th, 2017 @ 10:24am

    Where does contributory negligence end?

    Where does contributory negligence end?

    If there's a bank robbery...

    Like another poster said, can we blame the government for making roads, which makes it easy to get away?

    Can we blame Ford making the getaway car? They should have known that their products could be used for illegal activities and they should have built in more protection. You know, like Napster and other file-sharing software.

    Can we blame the DMV for giving Joe Robber a driver's license? He may not have driven the getaway car if he didn't have a license.

    Or why not blame Joe Robber's parents for not raising him correctly. Maybe he wouldn't have robbed the bank if they had raised him right.

  • Feb 22nd, 2017 @ 9:54am

    Let's go in the other direction

    Let's go in the other direction and say people shouldn't do anything on their own just in case they might get hurt.
    I still remember a scene from "The Simpsons" where they go a franchise-business expo and a company is promoting a business where people straighten pictures for other people. That's right- some people might get hurt trying to level their own pictures, so it makes sense to hire a professional to do it.

  • Feb 18th, 2017 @ 9:43am

    Hold the lawyer accountable

    I say this every time there's a story like this...

    There are 2 options here:
    1) The lawyer didn't know about Fair Use and filed a lawsuit.
    2) The lawyer does know about Fair Use and files a lawsuit anyway, at the direction of the client.

    The lawyer should be held responsible for either not knowing the law or ignoring the law to please a client.

  • Feb 10th, 2017 @ 10:17am

    Re: Re: No tax returns, no presidency... You're fired Mr. Scrotum...

    I agree- when has Trump ever smiled? Even when he seems to be happy, his face has a smirk instead of a genuine smile.

    As for his tax returns, I've read a few sites that speculate that he has a lot of business with Russian oligarchs. Maybe it's all completely legal through his many companies or maybe they're laundering mob-type money or who knows what.
    But how would the average American feel if they knew Trump was cozying-up to the Russian mob?
    And if he's cozy with the Russian mob, how does this affect foreign policy, especially with Russia?

    Also, how much business does he do in Egypt and Saudi Arabia? Why were these countries left off his immigration ban, especially when the 9/11 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia?
    Could he have investments (or debts) with the Saudi family?

  • Feb 10th, 2017 @ 10:05am

    In the interest of national security

    I think the Supreme Court should weigh in on this and adjust the list of banned countries, in the name of "national security".
    For example, when was the last time someone from Somalia or Sudan participated in a terrorist attack on US soil?
    Instead, we need to ban people from Saudi Arabia, since 12 of the 9/11 hijackers came from there.

    Oh, but Trump does business with the Saudi royal family and banning people from that country would hurt his businesses? Sorry, "national security".
    After all, the people in Saudi are Muslim, and if Muslims from Iraq and Iran are bad, then so are they. And, no, I doubt anyone on Trump's team knows (or cares) about the differences between Sunni and Shi'ite Muslims.

  • Feb 9th, 2017 @ 11:16am

    Re:

    *Warren was banned for repeating comments in the letter that impugned the character of the now sitting Senator Sessions.*
    If you're in favor of this result, will you also be in favor of banning Republicans (such as McDonell and Ryan) when they "impugn" the character of a Senator?
    Why were they not banned when they impugned the character of Obama, who as president, would have a higher status than a Senator?

  • Feb 3rd, 2017 @ 8:45am

    You can't stop propaganda

    "The FTC could develop a framework for pursuing fraud news about political propaganda..."
    That sentence explains why the idea won't go anywhere. What politician is going to vote to make propaganda illegal when they're either using it now or will be using it in the future.

    Even if fake news didn't tilt the election, it's still a good way to discredit an opponent.

  • Feb 3rd, 2017 @ 8:38am

    Huh?

    When I started reading the article, I thought it would be about how Take-Two Interactive accidentally used these two people's faces in advertising, leading the people to be embarrassed or such.
    Where's the "harm" or "damage" here?

    And once again, who's the lawyer that took on this case, knowing full well it wouldn't go anywhere?

  • Feb 2nd, 2017 @ 10:49am

    Hold the lawyer accountable

    By his own admission, the lawyer was simply hired to send out legal threats. This means 1 of 2 things:
    1) He doesn't know threats like these aren't enforceable in court.
    2) He does know threats like these aren't enforceable in court but took the company's money and sent the threats anyway.

    So which option is worse? And when will the court system start punishing lawyers for doing things like this, *especially* when they're "just following orders" instead of following the law.

  • Feb 2nd, 2017 @ 10:46am

    Re: Re:

    And I find it odd that the review says "I had a little spill on it"? Wouldn't a real review say something more specific, like "My baby hit a glass of juice that spilled onto the keyboard"?

  • Feb 2nd, 2017 @ 10:15am

    Re: Re: Re:

    And all of this goes back to the issue of why one download does not equal one lost sale.

    As it's been said over again with downloaded movies:
    * How many people download a game to try, then find they don't like it or it won't run on their system? Not a lost sale.
    * How many people collect games and no intention of buying or even playing it? Not a lost sale.
    * How many people download games to trade with other people for games they want? Not a lost sale.

    So, again, why are companies trying to fight these kinds of people instead of focusing on a better customer experience, which people will pay for?

  • Jan 30th, 2017 @ 10:04am

    Two points

    1) I actually wish this site would cover *more* topics and have more variety.
    Personally, I skip over the ongoing articles about stingrays, FBI e-mails, and such.

    2) But more importantly: this is your site and you can write about whatever you want. If people don't like the articles, they can skip over them or go to another site.
    And if people want to argue politics, there are plenty of sites to do that.

  • Jan 25th, 2017 @ 10:42am

    Is this normal?

    *It's possible to say that this is just the Trump administration hitting the pause button to figure out what's going on before moving forward again*
    Is it really "possible" to say this? Did Obama or Bush II do this? If not, then I don't think it's a "pause button" as it is "censoring" and "controlling the message".

More comments from John85851 >>