John85851’s Techdirt Profile

john85851

About John85851




John85851’s Comments comment rss

  • Apr 22nd, 2018 @ 8:46am

    Re:

    And hw do we pronounce the name of your band? Is it "Black Hat See-oh" or "Black Hat Ess Eee Oh"? :)

  • Apr 18th, 2018 @ 7:45am

    Re:

    I was just about to say the same thing, but then I realized: if Facebook really blocked all German traffic, would the people blame Facebook or would they blame the government? Something tells me that people would yell at Facebook for not cooperating with the government rather than complain about a bad law.

  • Apr 17th, 2018 @ 10:04am

    I say proceed with a lawsuit

    I say to proceed with a lawsuit since the first thing Gizmodo will do is file a motion that their article is truthful. And how do that do that? By subpoena-ing every customer of SmileDirectClub to see how many of them wound up with screwed-up teeth.
    Is this really something SmileDirectClub wants revealed in a public record? I'd bet they also run the risk of having a judge smack them down and require a warning that their product may or may not do what it claims to do.

  • Apr 2nd, 2018 @ 10:01am

    Re: Pardon me being the devil's advocate...

    That's an interesting "what if", but here's another: what if someone with a differing opinion actually has a good point to make? I know it's rare, but those people are out there.

    So I think what you're suggesting is a system that weeds out the far-leaning people that rely on "I just know it" rather than evidence and logic.

  • Mar 27th, 2018 @ 10:39am

    An odd quote

    I think this quote from Spielberg is odd:
    "I don’t believe films that are just given token qualifications in a couple of theaters for less than a week should qualify for the Academy Award nomination."

    Is he trying to argue that Netflix has a "token release" just to qualify for awards? Yet how many Oscar-bait movies are released on Christmas Day in New York and Los Angeles (only) simply to qualify for that year's Academy Awards?
    How many times have we seen TV commercials for movies that say "Opens in New York on Christmas Day, opening everywhere February 15th." A month and a half later for the rest of the country?? Really?? That's not a token release at all.

  • Mar 27th, 2018 @ 9:48am

    Re:

    Actually, CBS started their CBS All Access experiment with "The Good Fight", which is the spin-off of "The Good Wife". It started in January 2017, when "Star Trek: Discovery" was originally supposed to air.
    So now CBS should have all the fans of "The Good Wife" and all the Star Trek fans as subscribers.

    But if their streaming service is so successful, how come they teamed with Amazon to offer CBS All Access as an Amazon Prime channel? Could it be because of convenience? Did CBS realize that Amazon Prime provides a better user experience?

    So, like you say, let's see some real figures for CBS All Access.

  • Mar 22nd, 2018 @ 9:25am

    Other industries

    How long will it take this decision to affect other industries? I'm thinking about comic books in particular.

    It's been an accepted practice by artists to "homage" (or copy) previous artists' works. Will this come to an end, not because another artist will sue, but because the artist or publisher doesn't want to take a risk?

    Here's a good example:
    https://nicfoley.wordpress.com/2014/02/17/homage-overkill-crisis-on-infinite-earths-7/

  • Mar 22nd, 2018 @ 9:13am

    Re:

    Do some research on Weird Al. ;)
    Even though all of his parody songs are covered by the parody defence, he pays the license-holders a cut of the royalties. In an episode of "Behind the Music", Weird Al told a story about how the original artist got upset by his "Amish Paradise"... until the royalty checks from Weird Al started coming in.

    In this case, Weird Al paid Pharrell and Robin Thicke since they were the owners of the song, so I'm sure he's probably safe from being sued by the Gaye estate.

  • Mar 20th, 2018 @ 10:03am

    News from 100 years ago

    This just in: an automobile has killed a pedestrian. How can we let automobiles on the road when horse-drawn carriages are so much safer? A horse knows when a person is crossing the street and can stop, but those "horseless carriages" can not.

    I just don't trust this new technology. Won't someone please stop Mr Ford before his "automobile company" gets too much bigger?

  • Mar 20th, 2018 @ 9:58am

    Re: Sokath, his eyes open!

    Have researchers finished their study on whether violent movies cause violence?

    How about the research into whether reading comic books corrupts children? Actually, never mind, this issue has been settled since so many comic books are aimed at adults instead of kids. ;)

  • Mar 19th, 2018 @ 11:46am

    Not a data breach in the legal term

    The article sort-of answers it's own question:
    "But, regardless of where you come down on all of this, Facebook threatening defamation against the Guardian for calling this a data breach is ludicrous... "

    The answer:
    "There are legal reasons why Facebook is so concerned about whether or not this is a "breach"..."

    So the point is that Facebook is suing to prevent the legal term "data breach" from spreading too much further because the word "breach" means (or implies) data was stolen or server were hacked. But in this case, the data was freely given... sure, the data was misused, but it wasn't stolen.

  • Mar 14th, 2018 @ 10:51am

    So what

    At the risk of sounding cynical, so what if Trump and his team do this?

    The Trump supporters will ignore this because they think he's making America great again.
    The Trump haters will see that as yet another example of his bad character.
    Congress will do nothing.

    And the media will focus on Trump's gossip and drama instead of real stories like the firing of Tillerson and how the House's Russian-collusion investigation was a sham.

  • Mar 10th, 2018 @ 3:10pm

    Re: We have the solution!

    And all of this leads to:
    Censor the web > no more finding information > keep the population stupid > no more speaking up against the government because people don't know any better.

  • Mar 10th, 2018 @ 10:31am

    The end result of "I just know"

    And now we see the end result of a society that thinks "I just know" is more important that scientific data.
    Did Hillary Clinton run a child-trafficing ring out of a pizza parlor in Washington? "I just know it's true" despite any evidence.
    Did Hillary do something illegal by using a private e-mail server? "I just know it's true" despite numerous investigations by the FBI that didn't find anything.
    Was Obama really born in Kenya? "I just know it's true" despite the fact that he showed his birth certificate over and over.
    Has there been any proof that the government is going to take away people's guns, including the fact that the assault weapons ban was repealed? "I just know it's true".

    And since our Dear Leader seems to be the master of "I just know it's true", of course video games cause violence.

  • Mar 7th, 2018 @ 12:10pm

    I think there should be a meeting

    I think there should be a meeting between Trump and the leaders of the video game industry (whoever that turns out to be). And I think the meeting should be televised and "on the record".

    Then I think the video game industry's suggestions about how to stop real-world violence should be:
    1) Better gun control.
    2) Better access to mental medical care.
    3) Affordable access to mental health care.
    4) Reinstating the ban on assault rifles.
    5) Better gun licensing requirements.
    9999999) Video games don't cause real-world gun violence.

  • Mar 7th, 2018 @ 11:40am

    Two points

    First, I hope everyone can agree that the results of any survey should be prefixed with "Out of all the people who saw the ad and who clicked on it and who filled it out completely, our results show..." But this assumes surveys even reveal how many people took it, rather than simply saying "A lot of people took it and we'll apply our findings to all of the US or the world"

    Second, let's replace question #1 with anything else besides "on a computer":
    1. There is growing evidence that the major automakers are being used for purposes that may violate U.S. laws. Should the major automakers take responsibility for these uses of their cars?
    OR:
    1. There is growing evidence that the major gun-makers are being used for purposes that may violate U.S. laws. Should the major gun-makers take responsibility for these uses of their guns?

  • Mar 7th, 2018 @ 10:09am

    Give them what they want

    I say that Rhode Island should let their bill pass and be the testing ground for whatever follows.

    Imagine you're AT&T or Comcast and have 1 million customers in the state. Now imagine each customer has 3 devices, so let's say there's 3 million devices. Now imagine each device comes with a $500 liability if someone finds adult content.

    These companies are looking at billions (or tens of billions) of dollars of risk. How long would it take to decide it's safer not to do business in the state rather than face this possibility?
    Then how long would it take for EVERY provider to not provide service in the state?

    You can talk all day along about how the market will provide for itself and there will always be a company willing to give service of some kind, but this seems like the perfect example of government making it too expensive to do business in the state.

  • Mar 7th, 2018 @ 9:57am

    I'm not a lawyer, but...

    1) To the claim that Twitter is somehow the greatest political forum in the world and to get kicked off it is the worst thing in the world: I don't use Twitter and I've never even created an account. Yet somehow, I find plenty of places to talk about politics.
    So if at least 1 person doesn't need Twitter to be politically connected, then Twitter isn't a "requirement" for a political discussion.

    2) If we assume the guy has a novel approach to his case, let's apply his argument to the real world.
    If I went into a NAACP meeting and started ranting about "white power", would they violate my civil rights for kicking me out? If not, then how is that any different than Twitter kicking people off its service?

    So what about the civil rights of the people being offended and who don't want the person ranting?

  • Mar 6th, 2018 @ 10:10am

    What is terrorist content?

    Classifying something as "terrorist content" sounds like classifying any adult image as "porn": sure, there's the obvious stuff, but what about the not-so-obvious stuff? Who sets the rules?

    For example, if someone says "Death to all Christians", then that could probably be a terrorist threat.
    But if someone says "Death to all Muslims", then they're repeating what so many other people (and politicians) are thinking.
    Yet saying "death to anyone" should be treated the same.

  • Mar 3rd, 2018 @ 10:49am

    But movies are okay

    The judge ordered the kid not to play violent video games, but violent movies are just fine. Watch all the James Bond or gangster or military movies you want.
    Oh, and the kid shouldn't listen to "violent" songs also.
    And just to be safe, the kid shouldn't read violent comic books either. Let's not give the kid any ideas from reading a Batman comic book.

More comments from John85851 >>