Manabi’s Techdirt Profile

manabi

About Manabi




Manabi’s Comments comment rss

  • Jun 16th, 2017 @ 5:47pm

    Re: Idiots...

    That's exactly what they think. The idea is that growing consumption of media on smartphones and tablets via cellular connections will lead to more overages, thus increasing revenue. And if all the major telcos have limited plans with overage fees, consumers would have nowhere to flee to. Thus ensuring they stay and pay the overage fees.

    No one said Wall Street was nice.

  • Jun 1st, 2017 @ 10:40am

    Re:

    I believe this is the source article, I Googled some of the quotes to dig it up.

  • Jun 1st, 2017 @ 10:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Follow Common Sense Colorado

    That's not entirely correct. Most states allow for consensual sex among minors within a certain age range (three years is common). So the law recognizes that kids can consent *with other kids*. Just not with adults. Rape can, and is, charged for non-consensual sex between minors, even if they're inside that age range.

  • Mar 27th, 2017 @ 4:33pm

    Re:

    Unfortunately no, as then there'd have been multiple deaths: one (or more cops), Scott, and his girlfriend. She would have been killed in the hail of bullets unleashed when the cops all opened fire into the home.

    The actual takeaway is: pray that a cop doesn't come to your door in the middle of the night, so that you may live to see tomorrow.

  • Feb 14th, 2017 @ 6:18pm

    Re:

    Sort of. If the tower you're connected to is congested, then your packets get lower priority and you will see slower speeds. But if it's not congested, the lower priority doesn't mean much and you'll still get fast speeds. It's a much fairer way to do things than a straight slow lane.

  • Feb 7th, 2017 @ 3:21pm

    This is extremely easy to avoid

    This is easy avoid, just don't play ANY media in Windows Media Player. Get VLC instead, there's a portable version too so you don't even have to install it. Open the file in that and this fails.

  • Jan 24th, 2017 @ 7:09pm

    Re: Presidential Authority

    They're part of the executive branch, so he does have the authority to do so. However, he will have trouble if he tries to fire people. In general, civil service employees at or below the pay level of GS-15 cannot be fired on a presidential whim. Those above that pay level can be and are political appointees. People at GS-15 are senior employees who know how the system works and have access to information before their politically appointed bosses do. Combine that with the gag order and leaks of "censored" information will probably become quite common. (Censored here referring to information that Trump's administration tries to prevent being published.)

  • Jan 24th, 2017 @ 6:46pm

    Re: Re: Re: Hm

    It'd be hilarious if that was how the PTO interpreted it, and businesses started raising holy hell because they couldn't get any new patents or trademarks. Especially ones with huge sway with congress like the pharmaceutical companies.

  • Jan 21st, 2017 @ 10:14pm

    Re: That is a red plus sign.

    It's a Greek cross and is one of the earliest forms of Christian crosses. You may not be familiar with it, but it's definitely a cross.

  • Jan 11th, 2017 @ 3:18pm

    Re: Do you have a specific donation page to fund your defense?

    They don't have one yet, but it may be coming soon. From the next to last paragraph:

    At some point soon, we may set up a dedicated legal defense fund.

  • Jan 9th, 2017 @ 1:55pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Works for me...

    I think you missed the part in this case where the image found was in slack space. That means the GS employee had to run forensics software to find the image at all. This particular case goes way, way beyond someone digging through your files when you bring a computer in. This employee was hunting for stuff that wasn't even accessible from the file system. (In this case it was most likely a deleted picture, or something that ended up in slack space from web browsing. However malware could have put it there as well. There's probably no way to prove how it go there, so there's likely no actual case. Thus why the FBI didn't inform the judge of this fact when getting a warrant. Otherwise the warrant would have been denied.)

  • Jan 9th, 2017 @ 1:16pm

    Re: Re: Head, meet desk

    They can defend the bad cops legally without a PR offensive on their behalf. Just refuse to give statements, provide lawyers that provide the cop a vigorous defense and they've done their job just fine. I don't think anyone would complain about that, unions are there to defend their members. And they could, and probably should, do this in all cases.

    The problem is the PR offensive that the unions go on, attacking anyone, everyone and everything in defense of the bad cops. They do far, far more damage to the police than any of the bad cops in the process. People understand there's going to be bad actors that slip through the hiring process in any organization, but they don't expect the union to go out there claiming reality isn't reality in defense of the bad cops. That just tells people the union does not have a problem with bad cops, not that they defend all their members. And so, people stop trusting any cops.

  • Dec 28th, 2016 @ 3:16pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Probably most accurate is: Police departments only care about themselves.

  • Dec 15th, 2016 @ 2:16pm

    I'm pretty sure the GOP will move quickly, not subtly

    Frankly, I'm pretty sure the GOP will move quickly to dismantle net neutrality and neuter the FCC. They have done this before historically, and all signs are that many of the party leaders are eager to overplay their hand again. They gain control and they think they have a mandate for the worst of their ideas (such as Ryan wanting to destroy Social Security and Medicare), then get slapped down by the voters.

    Now some GOP in congress, particularly the senate, are more sane and will block congressional efforts from getting passed. (Notably, GOP senators have already said they won't support Ryan's plans to destroy Social Security and Medicare. And congress as a whole is still largely terrified of provoking another backlash like SOPA did.) But the Republicans in the FCC will probably go bonkers and push their agenda quickly, hoping no one will notice. It's going to take another SOPA-style backlash to reign it in, and even then I won't be remotely surprised if Trump just throws a Twitter hissy fit and refuses to back down. Congress is beholden to the reality of needing votes for reelection. Trump doesn't seem to have a very firm relationship with reality at all. I can easily see him thinking he'll get reelected no matter what he does, because in his world he's always right.

  • Nov 3rd, 2016 @ 5:21pm

    Re: For me, not for thee

    Considering the reason he hates Gawker so much is because their Valleywag site outed him as gay, that's absolutely true. It's made even sadder by the fact that apparently everyone already knew he was gay so it wasn't much of an outing.

  • Nov 3rd, 2016 @ 5:18pm

    Re: Send me an email

    Sadly, I could see the US patent office fucking up and giving him the patent if he tried.

  • Nov 3rd, 2016 @ 5:14pm

    Re: heres the thing...

    It's more than just that, he's also taken to accusing anyone who points out he didn't invent E-mail as being racist because they can't handle the fact an Indian-American invented it.

    In my opinion he's a delusional, insecure, egotistical asshole. I don't know what he was hoping to accomplish, but I can tell you that he's managed to make me have no respect for him whatsoever. If he'd not been such a delusional asshole, I might have respected the fact he created an E-mail program independently. And he can't sue to make me respect him. Respect can't be ordered by a court.

    Frankly I suspect he's just so stuck on himself that he really believes he did invent E-mail. Which doesn't say much about his grip on reality.

  • Oct 26th, 2016 @ 5:26pm

    Re: Re: Re: So....again a reason to ad block

    I don't know about their privacy policy, but if you live in a household of multiple adults (like I do), linking them that way dilutes the value of the data. Since they can't be certain the searches are by the same person, they'd be making the profile of your interests they've built worthless. Since they make their money on targeting ads to your interests, they'd be idiots to do this.

  • Oct 26th, 2016 @ 2:14pm

    Re: So....again a reason to ad block

    And when it comes to Google, if you have a Google account, don't search while logged in. I access my Gmail in a portable Firefox instance, and my main browser (where I do all my searching) isn't logged in at all. So my Google searches aren't being associated with my Google account. I also use Firefox on my phone instead of Chrome, but that's more so I can adblock on mobile.

  • Oct 26th, 2016 @ 2:09pm

    Re: Re:

    I can confirm, had them try this twice on my phone and then I had to deal with it on mom's and dad's phones. It's presented as no big deal, just something you should accept so you'll have better service. They also make it difficult to figure out how to reject it. If I'm remembering it correctly, you have to select "more information", and after that you can finally decline. (Also, you have to select more information to even find out what it changes.)

    Google has done this change extremely underhandedly. I have no doubts it was done that way on purpose. I just don't see how you could get it so confusing and tricky without actively trying to make it that way.

More comments from Manabi >>