Anon E. Mous’s Techdirt Profile

shuffle

About Anon E. Mous




Anon E. Mous’s Comments comment rss

  • Aug 4th, 2017 @ 8:43am

    (untitled comment)

    And this Jason dude wanted to be a District Attorney? How would this guy fair as a D.A. considering his Twitter postings? Not to well I would think.

    Then there is the postings on Stormfront (a known site that caters to White supremacists and their beliefs) could that have to do with Maybe why the D.A. didn't hire this guy when they rescinded the D.A. job offer.

    How would one feel if you were another race other than white and had this guy prosecuting you? Think you would get a fair shake? I am sure that is one of the questions the District Attorneys office had as well.

  • Aug 1st, 2017 @ 4:14pm

    (untitled comment)

    The fact that court knows that the FBI didnt follow the letter of the law and stated that the warrant was invalid is the right determination but then the court gives the FBI a pass by saying good faith so no problemo.

    The problem I have with this is the courts are leaning over backwards to allow evidence in cases to stand when it shouldn't have.

    This just gives the prosecution a tactical advantage that a defendant cant even come close to beating. Look I am not in favor of child molestors or those who buy, sell, trade or make kiddie porn, in my eyes they are way below scumbag level and as much as I would hate to see anyone of the aforementioned group go free, the governments and it's law enforcement partners need to play by the rules of law.

    The court should not be bending over backwards to allow the government and its law enforcement partners to salvage a case where there have been mis-steps and clear violations of the law in obtaining evidence etc.

    The court is supposed to impartial and weigh the evidence based on law but too many courts are allowing the government and its law enforcement partners to skirt the law and allow in evidence that shouldn't be based on violations used to obtain that evidence.

    More and more nowadays the courts have become too entwined with the prosecution and law enforcement and have lost the fact that they are supposed to be impartial.

    The scales for a defendant keep getting tilted towards the unequal side of the equation and thus put the defendant at a serious disadvantage of getting a fair hearing before the court and that is not the way it was intended to be

  • Jul 24th, 2017 @ 5:41am

    (untitled comment)

    Is anyone really surprised that someone the FBI recruited was still committing crimes? I doubt it. Let's remember the reason most of these "confidential Informants" the FBI recruits are people who have been caught by the FBI doing crimeS and took a deal to be a informant in hopes of avoiding jail or getting a lighter sentence if they helped rat out people for the FBI.

    There are a lot of FBI informants from turned mobsters to street thugs and your average criminal who go caught up in an FBI OP that have turned informant to save their own skin.

    Salvatore " Sammy The Bull " Gravano ran a major ecstasy ring while in witness protection after ratting out his fellow mobster and got 20 years for it.

    Alberto 'Alpo' Martinez' was a huge drug dealer in Harlem and helped intorduce crack and moved tons of cocaine into Washington DC. Alpo had major street cred so much so that he was depicted as an iconic figure in hip-hop mythology who was played by the rapper Cam'ron in the movie Paid in Full not only that Alpo was a rat who betrayed the street code to save himself after killing his drug business partner and ratting out his top enforcer to save his ass

    This is just two stories, there are lots and lots more out there. These are all people trying to save their own ass and if they have to lie, cheat, steal or commit some more crimes so be it.

    As for the FBI whose agents have been known to commit their own crimes, if you cant trust a fellow criminal, who can you trust

  • Jul 13th, 2017 @ 4:00pm

    (untitled comment)

    I had to laugh at this video, this is a pretty novel way to let someone know of infringement. Now we have to wait to see what coke will do.

    I give credit to this guy and his lawyer for doing it this way.. too funny

  • Jul 12th, 2017 @ 6:33am

    (untitled comment)

    The reason I believe that SOPA failed to gain any traction is because a lot of big corporations voiced their concern over SOPA as well as a lot of citizens and congressmen and senators caved to the very pressure that was thrust upon them from the anti SOPA movement.

    As we all saw though the pro SOPA crowd while defeated at that time, still was lurking in the back round working away to get their SOPA like ideas squeaked in thru the back doors.

    The anti net neutrality cause is still mired in their SOPA like thinking and Ajit Pai is leading the way to take the FCC into a toothless tiger and willing to screw us all for the almighty dollar and as we all know congressmen and senators will vote the way that the money flows to them in the form of PAC's by lobbyists.

    I hope that the pro net neutrality cause heaps some pressure on senators and congressmen to not let net neutrality get gutted and to throw some mud in Pai's face because of how he has already gone out of his way to screw the consumers and stifle competition.

    Let's hope that todays outcome will be startling defeat for Pai and the SOPA lovers

  • Jul 6th, 2017 @ 5:37pm

    (untitled comment)

    "Would you like to pay more for cable TV than you’re already paying? Then AMC has an offer for you: The cable programmer is going to start selling an add-on service that lets cable TV subscribers watch most AMC shows, without commercials, for an extra $5 a month"

    And of course AMC say's "Most AMC shows" and with that you have AMC's get out of jail free card when subscribers complain that "some" or "most" popular shows are excluded at AMC discretion.

    Sorry but "most" gives AMC an automatic out to decide how, w and what shows will be without ad s for those willing to pay. How will the AMC decide what shows will be ad free will subjective at best. Ho way in hell is AMC going to make their most popular shows ad free if there is not enough subscribers to take the 5 dollar ad free plunge.

    My guess is these shows will be one with not a great viewership or the popular ones that are in re run phase.

  • Jul 6th, 2017 @ 4:09pm

    (untitled comment)

    Of course the Government and it's law enforcement partners want to keep the no evidence needed and little if any documentation or notice to those whose cash they have looted from having the paper trail to follow to fight to get their cash back.

    This is free money for both the Government and it's law enforcement partners and they have purposely tried to obfuscate how and why they seized assets or funds and make it as obstacle filled as possible to get those funds or assets back to the rightful owner and those tactics are all be design to delay and frustrate a victim into giving just giving up trying to get the funds or assets back.

    I find it amazing that agencies that are sworn to uphold the law frequently flout it and break it at will and with no consequences to be had.

    Never mind that a person hasnt even been been charged with a crime nor found guilty of one but its lets get those cash or assets at all cost so we can all get a taste.

    Used to be as a child you were taught that the policeman is your friend and is there to help you, nowadays you have to be wary of said policemen because they are out to steal your money or assets if they can, cant tell who is the good guy and the bad guy anymore

  • Jul 6th, 2017 @ 8:05am

    (untitled comment)

    State Department’s Bureau of Economic Affairs, the MPAA & RIAA all join together to manufacture a twitter feud to promote the RIAA & MPAA's agenda and wish list of making it harder for you to get content and controlling how you get, where you get, who you get it from and for how much.

    So why is this such a concern that the State Department’s Bureau of Economic Affairs is out there and writing and trying to sign people on to a manufactured twitter feud?

    Seriously all these taxpayer dollars are being spent to advocate for Hollywood who has made more fucking money in the last 16 years then they ever have? and the State Department’s Bureau of Economic Affairs feels the need to jump on board with this so called "Hollywood Twitter feud" script?

    Let me guess some congressmen or senators got paid by Hollywood to fund a PAC for them and then the congressmen and senators pressured those at the State Department’s Bureau of Economic Affairs to get on board with this and make this a priority.

    Much like we saw with Hollywood using Mississippi AG Hood office to go after Goggle after funneling enough money his way we see Hollywood at it again. If people already didnt think the MPAA & RIAA were already a slimy bunch, this sure isnt going to make them look any better.

    Once again we see how this is not a Government for the people but against it. Taxpayer dollars used to fund Hollywood's wet dreams and agenda. This is another example of why Government is so corrupt and ineffective for the people.

  • Jul 6th, 2017 @ 7:45am

    (untitled comment)

    The UK has been using such systems for a long time and other countries are following the lead.

    The difference between China and the UK will be that China will be using this to crack down on dissent and to help track those who are encouraging subverse activity against the party or the state.

    You can bet your ass that those who China suspects are enemies of the state or party whereabouts will be much easier to track and apprehend and of course seek punishment against.

    I certainly don't believe that China will be using this new CCTV system and facial recognition to help the people feel safer or secure, more the threat of we are watching everything you do, behave or else.

  • Jul 6th, 2017 @ 7:37am

    (untitled comment)

    Got AT&T is so full of shit. No if you are lucky enough to have a choice of a second provider in your area, then yes AT&T is right, you dont have to use their service.

    However if you are like a lot of folks where AT&T is the only option then you have to use their service and you are automatically agreed to their arbitration, you can't opt out there is no "choice" to do that with AT&T.

    The fact that AT&T's "spin team" wants to dance around the fact that their customers are forced into arbitration when they use their service and act like the consumer has a choice is laughable and just shows how the deck is stacked against the consumer.

  • Jun 23rd, 2017 @ 1:56pm

    (untitled comment)

    Is it just me or did anyone else reading this story have a flashback to the days of when the Stasi and KGB used to encourage their citizens to report their neighbours if they suspected any activity that they thought was suspicious or subversive to the authorities.

    Somewhere Putin has a little tear in his eye reminiscing about the days of old at the UK's efforts to get their citizens to report their friends and neighbours to the authorities.

  • May 17th, 2017 @ 5:50pm

    (untitled comment)

    Sorry but Cannizzaro office knows full well those so called subpoena's are illegal and intentionally misleading as there were people having believed that the subpoena came from the court and was issued by the court and thus it instilled fear in people on the receiving end of these subpoena's that if they didn't comply with contacting Cannizzaro office that they faced arrest or jail time for ignoring the subpoena.

    Cannizzaro argument that it predates his tenure is just bullshit and a bad attempt at covering your ass. This is just another example of how blurred the lines are when it comes to the justice system and how police and prosecutors are routinely flouting the law to gain an advantage over those it wished to investigate or prosecute.

    The real tragedy here is that no one in Cannizzaro's office will be out of a job, they will pay a monetary penalty and settle the lawsuits and issue some bullshit statement about how this was a mistake and they have seen the error of using this method to get people to talk to them and then throw in the "but we didnt do nuffin worng" and go about looking for another way to get people to talk to them that will border the line of right and wrong.

    One would think that Cannizzaro and his office would try to maintain the image of being above board and playing by the rules of law and the court, but obviously Cannizzaro and hit team aren't very interested in making sure they aren't breaking the very laws they are supposed to uphold.

  • May 15th, 2017 @ 7:09am

    (untitled comment)

    Reason Hollywood is "helping" China monitor set top boxes & smart tv's for copyright infringement is nothing more than Hollywood fill another one of their wet dreams which is aimed straight at restricting what you can view on those smart tv's and your set top boxes.

    Think about how Hollywood has waged war on torrent files and streaming sites, URL blocking and it's latest was on Kodi and other boxes.

    Hollywood is using China as a proof of concept to block users from seeing content that Hollywood doesn't want you to have access to (without kicking them some money first) or by the way of a license to enable you or the box provider to view or allow it to be distributed via a program or add on to the box, this concept would also be applied to smart tv's no doubt.

    Hollywood would never get away with doing a trial like this to block or censor set top boxes or smart tv's in the U.S. or UK, but China one could see allowing Hollywood do it with a large contribution of cash from Hollywood to get the goverment to okay it.

    China also benefits because they to can use this to have another way to filter what their citizens see and where they are getting it from and then blocking access to views that it doesn't like from reaching the public.

    You can bet if this proves effective that Hollywood will push this revelation of battling copyright infringement to other countries by saying the stats prove this is most effective and will save thousands of jobs and the infusion of cash that Hollywood needs to survive from all that piracy that threatens to push Hollywood to the brink of collapse... or so they say.

    This is another of Hollywood's wet dreams to control where you get their content, how you get their content and what you pay to get their content and when you will get to see it.

    I would say this is like something out of a bad spy movie, China and Hollywood in bed together plotting evil against it's enemies, but no.... it's real

  • May 10th, 2017 @ 9:31am

    (untitled comment)

    Charter and Comcast want to team up to try and ascertain better deals on handsets, sure makes sense.

    Comcast and Charter wont go out on their own and buy another entity that is in the same genre as they are without notifying the other as to their intent...Uh Say what? So how does that help either of them or consumers, it doesn't.

    Comcast and Charter have basically signaled that they wont compete against one another and thus their customers are going to suffer from this non compete agreement (because let's be honest that's really what this deal is)

    What we are really seeing is that Comcast and Charter will use their collective might if it is going to benefit themselves (like in buying handsets) but when it comes to the consumers seeing any benefit, well not so much,

    While Comcast and Charter may call this a non compete agreement, I call this more collusion to not do anything to poach another subscribers and to hold their customers hostage in being tied to one of the two's services and making things difficult to switch to the others services as a consumer.

    Collusion comes in many forms and companies love to dress it up as non compete agreements and spin how this is beneficial for the consumer. Collusion allows companies to conspire against the consumer to benefit themselves and this agreement between Comcast and Charter just further emphasizes that

  • Apr 18th, 2017 @ 11:47pm

    (untitled comment)

    Webmasters have been trying to monetize traffic for ages, the problem is some have just dont give a shit what kind of ad's they serve up as long as they are getting paid and that is the problem.

    Some webmasters have gone to the extreme to get coin when someone happens upon their website, having banner ads and ad's on the side of the site just weren't good enough so then became the scrolling ads, then the op up ads, then the pop under ad's, then the mouse over ads, then the redirects, then ad overlays,then the Iframes, and on and on.

    The AD industry has itself to blame for this due to the fact that they have a hand in creating this mess. The Ad industry has made Ad's and the way they can be delivered so obtrusive that people are past the point of annoyed with it, webmasters also shoulder part of the blame for the type of Ads they are using on their site and serving to a visitor.

    Some websites Ads and tactics to get clicks just make a person not want to bother going on the site any further and they close it out and go elsewhere. If you asked my honest opinion Streaming sites Ad's have become unbearable even with Ad Blocking, it's bad enough that even adult webmasters are looking like saints and they had a reputation as some of the worst for Ad's that did all sorts of shit when you landed on one of their websites.

    Even with how prevalent Ad blocking has become look at some of the webmasters and advertisers and their response has been. Some Webmasters and advertisers see the Ad blocking as a sign that they are shooting themselves and their webmaster partners with obtrusive ads and are rethinking how they serve those ad's to not be so obtrusive.

    And there are those Advertisers and webmasters who thwart anyone with an ad blocker from surfing there site or make it so navigation doesnt work correctly or content wont work or be served or is outright blocked. Instead of trying to see what would serve them better the Advertisers and webmaster have taken the thermonuclear war approach and have declared war on ad blockers and those who use them.

    Honestly Ads have become intrusive enough on some sites even with Ad blocking that I just dont go to those sites anymore, and for those that want me to turn off my ad blocker or I dont get to see their content I say "Thanks, but I dont think so" and I move along, because there is still too much obtrusive and malware laden ad's out there for my liking.

    I have sites I visit where I know there are ad's, and I have whitelisted because their ads arent full of pop ups, pop unders, mouse over, I frames and redirecting me to death and I have no problem with them.

    The ones that have gone all nuclear war on my ad blocking, I just plain quit going to their sites, plenty of other places on the web where I can go where I dont have to deal with crap ads and webmasters who could give a rats ass what they serve up or how they serve up ads.

    Sorry but advertisers and webmaster have to have a look in the mirror when it comes to what they are doing to monetize their websites with the type of ads and they way they choose to serve them to their sites visitors

  • Apr 12th, 2017 @ 6:47am

    (untitled comment)

    So the FBI wants to tip toe around in computer that it can access around the world, and there saying this is to deal with botnets? Yeah ask me how much I think they will only use it for that.

    So why wouldn't they go after the main infrastructure of the botnet rather than the computers swept up in it? It wouldnt be the fact that they can have a peak in say those 50k computers that were made part of the botnet and see what is all in them would it?

    What is to stop the FBI from searching around or looking for anything else that they deem to be of importance to them and send it back to their own servers or servers off shore that they could rent, nothing really other than there word that they wont do this.

    No offense but I dont exactly believe that the FBI wouldn't use anything else it gleaned that they thought has value to further an investigation.

    This is a slippery slope, in that they dont want to target the offending infrastructure and send out a command or an update to infected computers to poit to malware removal tools or to remove an infection at so and so site, they want to access the zombies with a NIT, and that is an issue in my mind

    There is a high potential for abuse and you can bet your ass that everyone who wants something done with the FBI new ability to gain access to computers elsewhere will be all over to have the FBI do what they were unable to do thru legal means, like say are good friend at the MPAA and RIAA or say Microsoft or Apple to site that is selling illegal software or jail breaking apps.

    There is a high potential that the FBI could become a gun for hire to do what some groups cant thru legal channels for the above mentioned companies and organisations, and once that path gets taken then it's open season

  • Apr 7th, 2017 @ 3:50am

    (untitled comment)

    I am no fan of anyone who dabbles in CP. Do I think anyone who dabbles, creates or possesses CP should be punished to the full extent of the law, yes I do but the FBI seems to have f*cked this up royally where the Playpen case is concerned.

    The Playpen cases across the U.S. that have played out have been a mixed bag of rulings with courts saying " yeah you have to disclose the NIT to defense counsel" and some courts saying "no need to disclose the NIT" and some courts saying the "warrant used was invalid" and other courts sayin" warrant was good" It has been a mixed bag of rulings.

    The issue I see is that some of the courts seem more than okay with letting the FBI get away with all the problems with the various Playpen cases from the warrant problems, to the disclosure issues etc etc etc.

    With the mixed bag of rulings out there, I see these cases dragging on and on and either the US DOJ dismissing the ones that are sure to be appealed or to cut them off before they head from an appeals court and to SCOTUS at some point.

    For every ruling where the Judges such as this one in MN are calling the US DOJ out on what has transpired before this case landed in court, there have been just as many courts ruling the opposite and letting the cases advance forward.

    I have little empathy for those who were caught in these cases, but I still believe the US DOJ and it's law Enforcement agencies need to play by the rules

  • Mar 28th, 2017 @ 10:48am

    (untitled comment)

    The web one weaves when they practice to decieve

  • Mar 21st, 2017 @ 6:16am

    (untitled comment)

    Oh c'mon the IRS Criminal Division is still waiting in the wings for both Steele and Hansemeier. Remembers they made upwards of 6 million dollars and paid no income tax on that.

    Hansmeier also used the money from his so called trust inappropriately due to how the trust was formed and how those funds can be used and withdrawn, so I am sure the IRS took note of that as well.

    I sure Hope Hans and his wife have been declaring that cash for his ADA trolling or that may get added to the IRS checklist

    For so long Hansmeier and Steele lied and cheat the system, the system is now extracting it's revenge and rightfully so.

  • Mar 16th, 2017 @ 5:49pm

    (untitled comment)

    I freaking love this idea! Elsevier needs to be taken right out of the Academic Research Paper extortion business.

    Elsevier's model to stifle and sue any entity that threatens their pay for access model to research papers defeats the whole principal and model behind most research in that it is to be shared so others can learn from it and or build on it.

    Not every Educational institution has the financial means to pay the exorbitant amounts that Elsevier demands for access to academic papers under its control, that is even more egregious when you have taxpayer funded educational institutions who are constricted in some of their curriculum offerings because they simply cant afford to pay the prices Elsevier demands for access to the vast areas of academic research papers its holds.

    I think that this is a fantastic idea to help combat the Elsevier's of the world, academic research papers should be there for all to review and learn and build on.

    I hope this take off and does well, this is people putting their money out there not for profit but for a good cause and it;s one well worth it in my opinion.

More comments from Anon E. Mous >>