TasMot’s Techdirt Profile

tasmot

About TasMot




TasMot’s Comments comment rss

  • Jul 29th, 2015 @ 12:48pm

    It's Time for us Peaons to talk to our Gov'm'nt Representives

    Let's pass a real consumer protection law that requires manufacturers to put on very large print that a product they sell include a "watch you" feature that may include a "phone home" and talk about you feature.

  • Jul 29th, 2015 @ 12:19pm

    Google drops Spain.....

    Net Profit drops .00000000000000001% and nobody notices.

  • Jul 29th, 2015 @ 12:16pm

    Wouldn't be so bad if they gave you the TV

    and you agreed to be "sold". But a TV purchaser (you know someone who gave them money for the TV) is now going to be analyzed and have more ads forced on them. NOT COOL.

  • Jul 29th, 2015 @ 12:08pm

    It's not just GOOGLE, keep repeating, it's not just GOOGLE

    PLEASE, it would be one thing if just Google were the problem. However; MOST IF NOT ALL news aggregators got out of the business because of this new law. SO WHAT if Google was one of them.

    Would the Google haters please read the whole article and stop focusing on just Google. Many new aggregators went out of business to avoid this mandatory tax under a very vague law that just tries to give publishers money for other businesses sending them more business.

    Now Google AND MANY OTHER news aggregators stopped and the publishers have a lot of spilt milk to cry over as they end up with large drops in revenue because the advertisers are not getting page views anymore and ad rates WILL drop.

  • Jul 29th, 2015 @ 8:44am

    (untitled comment)

    Ahhhh, but isn't it great. Google isn't making any money off of those Spanish newspapers (and really who cares that they are all making A LOT less money themselves). Those Google leeches aren't going to make any money off of Spanish newspapers even if they all have to close up. Cue the nose/face joke here.

  • Jul 22nd, 2015 @ 7:34am

    How about a "Schmobbyist"

    He's a schmoozer that lobbies (but less than 20% of his work time).

  • Jul 21st, 2015 @ 8:47am

    (untitled comment)

    OK, one more thought. If your driverless car is parked at a meter that has a 2 hour limit with no renewal and you've told your car that it's 10:00 now and at 12:00 the meter is up, can the car go find a different parking spot on it's own? Or, is there going to be a new law that prohibits that?

  • Jul 21st, 2015 @ 8:45am

    (untitled comment)

    In many ways, the driverless cars are going to be a huge boon. Even the poor who "may" bear some additional cost IF they even have a car but will benefit from the driverless taxis that could be more responsive (no meal or potty breaks) and cheaper. As for the change in "revenue" from police departments, tere will be less accidents, less tickets and then there will be less need for police personnel to write up traffic reports (and less time investigating highway fatalities), but also there will be less judges and all of the associated courthouse personnel required to process tickets and other driving violations. So the cost to the public should be reduced. In Maryland, cars already have to have a vehicle environmental inspection where they check the vehicle milage. In the future, it will just include a mileage tax (assuming that there is a reduction in the gas tax anyway). There will be a huge rebalancing of money flow by the driverless cars. The cars will cost more initially, but as mentioned body shops, insurance rates, parking fees, and many other costs will go down drastically.

  • Jul 15th, 2015 @ 2:29pm

    (untitled comment)

    One other angle, most McDonald's stores have security cameras now. They better get copies of those films so that timings can be done to determine what "fast enough" really means.

  • Jul 15th, 2015 @ 2:26pm

    (untitled comment)

    The reporters need to keep quiet for a little while. They can't even get the names of the officers that "charged" them with the crimes (I mean assaulted them). If the county prosecutors are actually stupid to file court charges, at some point they are going to have to name the officers. At that point, the false arrest and illegal detention charges can be filed against those officers.

    Just let that hubris and prosecutorial stupidity run rampant just a little longer.

  • Jul 14th, 2015 @ 2:39pm

    Re:

    Let me fix that for you, it's the USA:

    United Sadist of America.

    Let's face it, all thats missing from her detainments is the gratuitous body cavity searches.

  • Jul 14th, 2015 @ 9:51am

    Re: 2GB to the modem, 200MB to your computer?

    Not to over-generalize, but normally, 2 GB to one computer is overkill when connecting to the Internet. The only time I've been able to utilize a large portion of the 1 GB connections I have in my house are on computer to computer transfers when using SSDs or large RAID arrays. However; streaming video or multiple simultaneous uploads and downloads can certainly use a large portion of that 2 GB. It does mean that the subscriber is going to need a better than typical home use switch. They are going to need a "Smart" or "Managed" switch with a true upload port that is greater than 1 GB. Then, each user gets a 1 GB connection and the switch has an upload port that is the "Up To" 2 GB that Comcast will never deliver after the first few speed test after the installation.

  • Jun 26th, 2015 @ 2:52pm

    (untitled comment)

    It was “likely” that terrorists would stop using phones in favor of mail or courier


    One of the curious "misses" based on this statement is that if indeed the "terrorists" were to start using the snail-mail system instead of phones, active terrorism would take a tremendous slow-down in activity. If all of the various methods of detecting terrorist activity were made public then the terrorists are going to have to start going back to actually meeting with each other to communicate because none of the modern electronic methods are going to be unwatched. Even the meta-data that encrypted emails are passing from a suspected terrorist to someone new would mean that a better watch can be kept on the network of terrorists. Instead, the spooks are way to interested in snooping on everybody instead of slowing down or stopping the terrorists by making it too hard for the plots to develop. /rant

  • Jun 26th, 2015 @ 11:50am

    (untitled comment)

    You got that new title wrong.

    Breaking: NOBODY GOT HURT IN SELF-DRIVING CAR NON-ACCIDENT. Self-driving cars avoid accident, doing exactly what they are programmed to do.

  • Jun 23rd, 2015 @ 10:27am

    (untitled comment)

    Does an alien from the future count as a "person" in the present? Copyright requires that the copyright be held by a person, hence the whole "the ape took the picture" fiasco. An alien from the future is not a person under the legal definition.

  • Jun 15th, 2015 @ 9:46am

    (untitled comment)

    But the CIA had another excuse for not releasing the information, and it's a classic. Yes, the CIA said that United States law forbade the CIA from mailing out "obscene or crime-inciting matter."


    If they can get past the first issue of the "operational file" non-sense, then they can solve the problem of "mailing porn" by just asking for a pickup location and time so that it doesn't have to be mailed. That should generate some interesting new BS out of the CIA.

  • Jun 2nd, 2015 @ 11:36am

    Re:

    I would go with a loud and fully unqualified "NO". They fully expect that the programs will be re-authorized in some form or fashion very soon, and so nothing will stop "until they are really, really, really, ... sure" that the programs will actually need to be stopped. And even then, there will probably have to be a long drawn out multi-year court battle that no one is allowed to be in except the people with the proper clearances (and that does not include the Senators, the Members of the House of Representatives, reporters - legitimately recognized or not, civil rights groups, or citizens of the US). That will come in maybe the next 5 years or so. Until then expect to continue to foot the bill for some very expensive non-programs. Well, unless they can figure out how to just shift it under some other "program", "authorization", or "organization" that can keep it going somehow and just no longer call it by the existing code name. Just prepare yourself for a LOT more tap dancing.

  • Jun 2nd, 2015 @ 11:28am

    Re: Seriously?

    Didn't you read the book? Ernest Goes to Washington (Well, not exactly)

  • Jun 2nd, 2015 @ 11:11am

    (untitled comment)

    Well, those blasted Senators, they are just starting to listen to their constituents about the massive invasion of privacy that they don't like due to the programs that they let expire that the administration can't say is making us less safe. MR. EARNEST seems to be very good at making long vaguely accusing sentences that don't answer the question but do point the finger somewhere else for letting a very expensive program expire that has no evidence of doing anything.
    An extremely huge piece of the problem is that "supposedly" these programs are protecting us, you know, the citizens of the US. However; us little kiddies are just too untrustworthy to know anything about all of these extremely expensive programs we have to pay for anyway.
    What I get out of that interview is that MR. EARNEST wants all of the 1st graders that are asking him the hard questions to just shut up and pay his expensive salary, BECAUSE, he know's better than us based on the non-existent evidence they can't show us, because, you know it would make us less safe (only they can't say so).

    P.S. Am I getting any good at really long vague sentences that don't really say anything?

  • Apr 23rd, 2015 @ 1:49pm

    Law enforcement agencies are servants of the Citizens and yet are being allowed to hide contracts from the ones they serve?

    One of the problems I see that is not being addressed is that the police departments are agents of the citizens. They are writing contracts that then hide the terms of the contracts from the very ones they represent. Police departments and other law enforcement agencies are not some independent company. They are representatives of the citizens and are writing contracts as their agents. They SHOULD not be allowed to hide the terms of those contracts and their methods from the very citizens they represent.
    How do the citizens start reigning in these rogue agencies that are supposed to protect and preserve and yet seem to be more attack and destroy and hide the methods organizations.

More comments from TasMot >>