TasMot’s Techdirt Profile


About TasMot

TasMot’s Comments comment rss

  • Oct 16th, 2020 @ 5:50am

    Verizon 5G

    Here: https://www.verizon.com/coverage-map/, is a Verizon 5G coverage map. However; the most important thing to look at is that all those red 5G splotches. Wow, so much 5G coverage. Until you look at the "Legend". In there, the red 5G splotches are 5G AND 4GLTE coverage combined. There is no just 5G coverage displayed in the map, at all.

  • Oct 14th, 2020 @ 11:34am

    (untitled comment)

    Constitution, what constitution? This is about the government protecting the government. It is no longer about serving the citizens they were elected to protect. AKA, high-court vs. low-court justice. T.Rump says prosecute those who spread "Fake News" except when he does it.

  • Oct 14th, 2020 @ 8:28am

    Fake News

    Why isn't T.Rump tweeting about this load of fake news? Oh Yeah! It's his fake news. This is not the fake news he's looking for......
    Yep, look over here where he has recovered from Covid thanks to $100K of doctor's care.

  • Oct 3rd, 2020 @ 10:03am

    (untitled comment)

    Because trademark owners now want to own each and every word in their trademark, not just the trademark phrase. So, "Be Boss, Be Kind" and "Hugo Boss" both contain the word boss. Since the Hugo guy was first, he want's to own EVERY use of Hugo or Boss. Just because they got money.

    When are trademark offices going to start denying these types of applications? The trademark was on Hugo Boss, not Hugo and Boss.

    There must be a lot of lawyers in trademark offices that just want to keep their buddies (lawyers and judges) working at high billing rates.

  • Sep 11th, 2020 @ 8:31am

    Just Fishing

    So a filter for words or phrases would suspend my account if I posted a tweet and said "I caught a perch yesterday and cut myself. That filet is going to have a little extra bloody flavor. Band-aid should fix it right up."

    Based on a word filter, I am a person at risk and my account should be suspended. In real life, I need somebody nearby with some anti-biotic and a band-aid.

    If I actually meant to hurt myself, I need somebody to see the tweet and respond that they are there to help or will get help.

    On the other hand, Twitter seems to want to follow the "head in sand" method of dealing with it and hiding the problem, not resolving the problem.

  • Sep 9th, 2020 @ 5:48am

    (untitled comment)

    Except for bragging about a satellite system, you would think that burying fiber once would end up being cheaper (and way more permanent) than a satellite. Based on the launch and maintenance cost fiber sure does seem like a cheaper long term option. See here for cost references: https://science.howstuffworks.com/satellite10.htm#:~:text=Launching%20a%20single%20satellite%20into, be%20almost%20%2414%2C000%20per%20pound.

  • Aug 14th, 2020 @ 12:39pm

    (untitled comment)

    AND, after 8 years in the film business, they have not found a way to properly secure their property and/or start suing over hosting the films in torrents. If they sued a torrent host, they could stage (and film) the raids on the locations of the computers hosting the torrents and stop the downloading. However; that would stop the potential revenue stream from the "settlements" of the suits every month (provided their new lawyers aren't stealing it from them - https://www.torrentlawyer.com/lipscomb-claimed-malibu-unprofitable/

  • Jul 20th, 2020 @ 12:23pm

    (untitled comment)

    Ah, you missed another point, now the CIA is going to be asking for more and more money for another eternal war like the war on terror and the war on drugs. This is the beginning of the approved cyberwar on whomever they feel is the enemy of the moment. No supervision. No prior approval. No public documentation. Just more and more taxpayer to give a cyber-beatdown to the bad-guys-of-the-moment or whatever else they feel like attacking. Look out Google and Amazon, TenCent and TikTok! The CIA feels like gunning for you today.

  • Jul 8th, 2020 @ 12:28pm

    (untitled comment)

    Second, the line about 230 being a shield "that is not enjoyed by any other industry in the same way" is also nonsense.

    Oh come on, if every industry was liable for what others did, then road builders couldn't build roads, car builders couldn't build cars; just in case somebody else did something bad with them. Knife makers, gun makers, all sorts of explosives makers would be liable if others did something bad with the things they made. AND, all the different companies involved in communications (phones, equipment, backhaul, towers, even the people leasing the ground used for towers) would not do any of it if they could be sued because someone used a phone call to do something bad. When will the idiocy of correctly assigning blame to the wrong-doers be firmly established. The idea of suing Twitter, Facebook or other providers because one of their users did something illegal on the platform is just stupid. Instead of changing 230, we need a smart politician to put in place a law that immediately does a treble legal fee back-charge (plus a $100K nuisance charge) to anyone who files the frivolous lawsuits against the platforms when they are found innocent of any violations because they were protected by 230 (or let's throw in the 1st Amendment as well).

  • Jul 7th, 2020 @ 10:55am


    Welcome to the facts optional 2020's. It's easier to generate FUD if all the meanings are very blurred and no actual facts presented, just grumblings about vague fears and conflated ideas.

  • Jun 23rd, 2020 @ 11:59am

    (untitled comment)

    Mike, you missed one reason why we desperately need to get rid of Section 230 altogether: "IT'S A RICO ACT VIOLATION".
    Now go get rid of 230. /sarc

  • Jun 23rd, 2020 @ 11:49am


    However; in any real conversation about this article, please notice that in every one of his statements, he directly references the section of the law both in the article and with a link to the actual law. NO VAGUE HAND WAVING, links to the actual law.

  • Jun 3rd, 2020 @ 11:48am

    Re: The problem with peaceful protests...

    One of the issues with a "peaceful" protest is that there are more bad apples running around out there just looking for opportunities. And, I'm not even talking about cops. As soon as a peaceful protest lasts more than an hour or so, and especially if it starts to run into the night, the really bad opportunistic apples start coming out for the burning and looting. There is no way to visually determine who is a good apple protesting for the cause, and who is a bad apple looking to start trouble, start a fire, and then start the looting to try to get away with grabbing something of value for nothing during the disturbance while the cops are busy trying to protect or suppress the protesters.
    The Posse Posse Comitatus Act (of 1878) prohibits the use of the Armed Services on US soil. However; the Armed Services by definition recognizes only the designated organizations of the US Government. It doesn't recognize the newly ARMED police forces that show up in MRAPs, body armor, smoke grenades, and machine guns to shoot with at the crowds. So let's get the newly armed police departments classified as Armed Services since they have all of the equipment of the actual Armed Services and not let them operate on US soil.

  • May 27th, 2020 @ 9:02am

    This Will Probably Come Back to Bite Them Later

    So, I'm a fictional AT&T customer. I have my little AT&T phone in hand and I decide it's time to get a new phone. I walk into the AT&T shop and start looking at phones. The salesperson starts touting the WONDERS of 5G, it is so fast, it will cure cancer, it will auto-magically drive your car for you. And, here is our newest most wonderfullest 5G phone for just an extra million $$$ a month you can be one of the few that actually access the 5G network. And said customer looks at their current phone at the 5G symbol on it, and the "other" phone they were looking at and sees that it also says 5G on it, and so then says to the sales rep, I'll take this cheaper one and not pay extra for that 5G phone and plan because "SEEEEE" I already have 5G and it is not faster and this here cheaper phone also gets 5G and is a lot cheaper. Give me the cheaper phone and plan please. NOOOO, stop lying to me about how much better that 5G phone is, "SEEEEE" this one has 5G also, I'll take this cheaper one and the cheaper phone.

    Why on earth would they want to convince their current customers they already have 5G? There's no need to upgrade if the customer already has it.

  • May 15th, 2020 @ 7:45am

    At the Time of the Writing of the US Copyright Rules....

    The 28 year possibility of copyright for a work was a lifetime. Now, however; the lifetime of current copyright holders is quite literally hundreds of years. Disney CORPORATION, a legal artificial person, in its current configuration or when it is bought out, will last for centuries. Why would they want to let go of their "property" and have other use it when they can legally wrest control of it possibly for centuries. What they probably really want is for Disney itself to be the "artist". Then, it will never die. Therefore it has a forever copyright. Currently, copyright is until the death of the author plus 75 years. Just imagine if Disney itself were the author? It would probably never die. Of course, then the monkey selfie would be held by the suddenly created corporation that was created solely to hold the copyright!
    Can't you hear the corporate chants already "We live forever, no more free riding on the public domain by those real people" and "long live the corporations, the sole owners of copyright".

  • Apr 25th, 2020 @ 7:52am

    (untitled comment)

    And unlike the Hollywood/RIAA member nitwits, it is going to be exclusively broadcast everywhere they can to get maximum exposure. That's got to be something new and out-of-the-box, eh!

  • Apr 22nd, 2020 @ 7:51am

    (untitled comment)

    So, I just want to know. All of the big telecom companies campaigned very, very hard to be NOT classified as a public utility. Why then, do we have to give them subsidies? Let them build their own networks and where they don't provide service, let somebody else do it. Just stop giving them the free money for executive compensation and actually start letting them do it themselves. THEY ARE NOT A UTILITY. Just like they wanted. STOP GIVING THEM MONEY LIKE THEY ARE ONE.

  • Apr 13th, 2020 @ 7:32am

    Re: Re: Re: But that's the point

    It can barely make it through a hundred feet of open air in a stadium; the skin on one's face has probably killed most of the signal before it even gets to the skull.

    Now we need a graduate student to do a study by taking some of the conspiracy theorists that claim 5G is bad, install a sensor under their skin and on top of their skin to measure the signal strength of the 5G signal. That would get them off the streets and upon completion of the study it would prove one way or another if the signal even could get to the brain to affect it.

  • Mar 28th, 2020 @ 11:22am

    A Question About 5G

    OK, so all the big telcos have been complaining about "the congestion" on their lines. Not from the device to the pole, from the pole on out to the Internet. If that's the case, why are they investing in the magical pixie dust of 5G. All that is going to do is increase the congestion, you know, because 5G is so much faster (in the 3 little spots it actually works). Could you imagine if they actually deploy at scale? All of the ----WAY---- over congested backhaul lines are going to get even more congested. So, they are going to need even higher fees and lower caps to "manage" the network. Those 5G fees are going to have to go higher, not lower because once (and if) they ever get deployed at scale, there will be so much more congestion that us poor 4G customers are just going to have to wait wait wait while the 5G devices use up all the bandwidth on the backhaul. What am I missing here?

  • Mar 9th, 2020 @ 7:27am

    (untitled comment)

    Diaz said the man told her the media reported the accusations, but not his acquittal, so he was left with a damaged reputation and no recourse. Diaz said the man gave her a copy of the bill, which appears to echo a bill filed in Mississippi.

    Maybe Rep. Diaz should instead support a law that would post the acquittals on the court docket instead of always requiring FOIA lawsuits to get to the outcomes of "public" court documents. Then with Google indexing the court dockets and the decisions, (and maybe some emphasis by the Google algorithms) the final decisions would automatically be available to the general public without multi-year lawsuits being the "norm".

More comments from TasMot >>

This site, like most other sites on the web, uses cookies. For more information, see our privacy policy. Got it