Narcissus’s Techdirt Profile


About NarcissusTechdirt Insider

Narcissus’s Comments comment rss

  • Nov 13th, 2017 @ 7:14am

    What do they need in this case?

    I'm a bit confused why they need access to his phone? We know who did it and he's dead. Justice served, case closed.

    If they want to trace his step then his provider should have this info. If they want to know if he talked to anybody before the shooting, his provider has this info.

    It seems to me unlocking the phone will not add anything to the case or harassing the justice thing.

  • Nov 8th, 2017 @ 12:28am

    Re: I too was banned for negative reviews!

    And, like the movie critics, all other TechDirt commenters could've come together and protested it, for example by not commenting anymore. Perhaps that would've led to TD reinstating you.

    I think if you had anything of value to offer instead of rage-commenting on every singe article without offering any additional argumentation, they might have. Especially if they weren't still confronted with your comments anyway, which mostly amount to: "I am being censored boohooo!!!"

    If I thought it would help I would advice you to engage in the hardest of all activities, self reflection.

  • Nov 2nd, 2017 @ 5:52am

    Re: Re: Re: Hard Jobs

    Why do I see this scenario play out in my mind with a Yakety Sax soundtrack?

  • Oct 23rd, 2017 @ 3:50am

    (untitled comment)

    I agree with the court in this one, unless you want to exclude fingerprinting from all evidence.

    When you're arrested you have to give your fingerprints and that could lead to your conviction if your fingerprints match prints found on something connected to the case. So that's tantamount to incriminating yourself as well. It seems though that everybody is fine with that.

    Although it's still complicated because in this case it seems they went on a fishing expedition and compelled everybody in the general vicinity to be fingerprinted. That is a dangerous path in my view. Now it was "limited" to all residents of the residence. What is to say they can't "limit" it to all residents of a certain neighborhood, city, state, country?

  • Oct 20th, 2017 @ 2:58am

    Re: Re:

    That, to me, is not even remotely the point. I'm also surprised that it was so low a budget and it probably didn't move the needle much.

    What should worry Americans is that they elected a president that was pushed by the Russians. They now have a man in charge that has the Putin stamp of approval.

    Especially since he was elected on a wave of Jingoism that should raise a lot of red flags with his supporters. They seem to care the least though.

  • Oct 19th, 2017 @ 4:53am

    Re: Why do corporate-owned properties never get seized?

    Perhaps we should start asking drug dealers to do their business in Trump Towers? There is one conveniently located near you too!

  • Oct 19th, 2017 @ 4:21am

    Re: How TechDirt Can Do Better

    @John Doe: Perhaps it might be an idea to drop TechDirt TechSupport a mail. I experienced similar problems despite not (always) using a VPN and even being a Techdirt Insider. Also I think my posts are not generally offensive (unless you are offended by stupidity perhaps).

    After I dropped a mail to them asking why they looked into it and there was some problem with my account. They fixed it and since then all my posts go through without being held for review.

  • Oct 18th, 2017 @ 4:23am


    "It requires several high-ranking officials to insert and turn their keys at the same time,"

    They have to physically go somewhere, insert and turn their keys?That sounds really Cold-War-era like. So, every time they want to make a backup (which I assume would be at least daily) "several" officials need to go somewhere and turn a key?

    I have a feeling this Network Security Vendor just made this up.

  • Oct 4th, 2017 @ 1:44am

    Re: Re: Re: Hmmm.

    Okay, we all agree it was good advice so what "benefit of the doubt" should I give the guy?

    He's a high paid lawyer that gives good legal advice. Kind of what you expect from your lawyer, good advice. If I need advice about private e-mail accounts used for sensitive government business I know I can go to him. Now, how does that make any of this better and/or worse?

  • Sep 28th, 2017 @ 1:12pm

    Re: Re: Is it a bad thing?

    "This will result in a few big fish that gobble the smaller fish."

    Not necessarily. For sure there will be big fish but there will also be a space for niche players. Seeing current prices and what cable costs you could say that people would be able to subscribe to 3 or 4 services without increasing cost. So for example 1 or 2 big fish, a sci-fy service and a Marvel service, something like that.

  • Sep 28th, 2017 @ 6:08am

    Is it a bad thing?

    I agree it sucks to have to subscribe to 15 different streaming services to keep up to date with popular culture and I also agree it will likely increase piracy.

    I can't help thinking there is also a good side here though. CBS signed up a big crowd with their new Star Trek. What they will find out is that if they don't follow up on that offering (or offer a tepid series) the trekkies will leave very fast too. That's is the great new freedom of the streaming services, you can end them every month usually.

    So, it could start a fierce competition for the streaming dollars which, by nature, are limited. So if the streaming service doesn't offer good value for money they are destined for ignominy. It could be a new golden era of creativity and competition.

    Of course I could be too optimistic but the potential is there.

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 11:42pm

    Re: Re: What is the point?

    If I compare current systems the US version looks much more like the French that also selects its president separately.Also historically it seems much more likely (to me) they looked at France than England to set up a system since they seemed to like each other a lot (see statue of liberty). So I'm not sure they were thinking of a king when creating the position of president.

    I also find it a bit hard to believe they tried to make a system with dysfunction in mind. They were extremely smart people and they could and did put limitations on what the federal government was supposed to do and not do. If you set up a government you want it to govern and you're not going to set it up to fail.

    Failure of the central government was way too big a risk to take, especially in those times. Now I think of it, it would be a thing in any time...

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 11:29pm

    Re: Re: What is the point?

    The checks and balances are inherent in the Trias Politica itself aren't they? Legislative controls Executive and both are controlled by the Judicial.

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 10:01am

    Re: Re: What is the point?

    Fair point but I feel it would be much stronger if the presidential candidates would be independents. Right now they're party members too, meaning that the group think is still an issue and possibly worse.

    The fact that the US has only 2 parties doesn't make things better in that respect.Right now the 2 parties have a very big incentive to make the candidate for "the other side" fail.

    I think most heads of state have veto powers by the way. They're rarely used (as should be) but they exist.

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 9:51am

    Re: Re: What is the point?

    Thanks for those deep insights!

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 7:28am


    Wouldn't it be hilarious if it came out that the leaks from the White House were actually coming from hacked private e-mail accounts used by The Donald & fils to discuss government issues?

    Just thinking about that outcome makes me giggle.

  • Sep 27th, 2017 @ 7:10am

    What is the point?

    Can somebody explain me what they think is the advantage of electing the president separately? I'd also be interested if somebody can explain to me what the founding fathers thought was the advantage.

    In many countries representatives are elected and the biggest party supplies the prime minister who forms the government, if needed together with other parties. In this system the president or, as the case may be, the king or queen, is only a figure head. The one that cuts ribbons on grand openings.

    To me that seems more logic because you're sure that parliament supports the government so they can get shit done. I'd be interested if somebody could at least explain the reasoning behind electing the president separately.

  • Sep 8th, 2017 @ 12:33am

    Of course...

    Ms. Page wrote: “I hate to bring this up, --- Brewvies is showing Deadpool. --- I know some people who have seen it.

    Yes, and I'm asking for a friend...

  • Sep 7th, 2017 @ 2:30am


    I just wanted to give my heartfelt congratulations!

    A world without Techdirt would be a bleaker place so I'm happy we're not venturing into that alternative timeline.

  • Sep 6th, 2017 @ 5:40am


    I think those other major sports don't have that option. Most sports coverage is very focused on popular sports.There's is probably hundreds of hours of TV a week about Football during the season. How often do you see women's gymnastics?

    Most major sports (basketball, baseball, football, soccer etc.) are mostly irrelevant during the event-that-shall-not-be-infringed-upon. It's about the small sports for whom this is their whole raison d'etre.

More comments from Narcissus >>