"Journalists Need A Point Of View" - It would be a huge improvement for them to actually be journalists; rather than spin doctors. For a given story, provide as much of the facts as can be determined and let the audience make up their own mind. If done correctly, I shouldn't even know what the journalist's thoughts, on the matter at hand, are.
When it comes to reporting on politics, the media need to recognize that there is a whole 360 degree spectrum of thought and not just left/right or blue vs. red. Libertarianism being one example that political reporters seem completely baffled by.
Seems to me that improvement in information sharing was a key feature that sold us DHS.
As a layperson looking on from the outside, I see no signs that a decade of improved intelligence gathering has improved our lot in the least. I then balance that against the clear unmistakable fact that Americans have lost essential liberties that we are not likely to get back.
Not to mention that all these "improvements" will never give use perfect security. So I for one would, far and away, prefer more liberty and freedom than having the biggest daily intel report known to man.
As I said at the top, I usually really like your stuff so I don't want to argue with you. My stuff on the other hand can seriously use an editor.
One last point, and I'll let you move on to more useful activities: we will be very lucky to get even a tiny improvement in your liberties (in our lifetime). When dealing with congress keeping things as black and white as possible is important. So "Repeal the Patriot Act, Now" is more likely to have an impact than: "but don't forget about the hazmat suits".
I got what you were saying. My point is the small amount of good you have pointed out is hardly even worth mentioning.
To frame it another way: your suggestion, that we try to surgically save the few little healthy cells from this massive flaming ball of cancer growing so large that is pushing us ever closer to the sun, is some we should all definitely get behind.
I normally like most of Dark Helmets posts but he is way off base on this one.
Just to keep this focused: how could you possible balance your three reasons for keeping this act (which boil down to the ease of moving money around for some), against the loss of liberty for everyone one in the country; including future generations?
We have gotten so use to Congress ignoring/ignorance of the constitution that we have been placated into not tar and feathering them within an inch of their lives....
They violate their oaths of office daily, if not by the hour. They have been doing this generations (but has really picked up steam starting in the 90's). So the reality is, by continuing to vote for these idiots, the conversion of the 'home of the free' into the 'home of the whiners' is completely our fault.
I haven't heard many people suggest outlawing plea bargains. I'm not an expert in this area but it is my understanding that many countries have done just that; as they understand the corrosive effects of the whole bargaining process.
While disruption by the internet is a significant force on journalism, I think the biggest negative driver is themselves. Once reporters stop offering even the pretense of reporting just the facts of a story and openly promoted only editorial spin, their days were numbered.
It’s my understanding that the wheels came off the track almost immediately; with Congress directing federal support for the city of Savannah after their great fire. They knew it was unconstitutional for congress to divert tax dollars to aid the city but they did it anyway. One more example that the road to hell is paved with good intentions.
Newspapers died when they switched from reporting the facts and trying to keep aware of their bias to pushing their spin/agenda. This is a death that has been coming for decades; well before web browsers even existed.
I think the last election cycle, with more people reading alternative viewpoints on the web, has pushed newspaper and mass media to the edge of the cliff. I'm a little surprised that they don't know just how dead they are.
Okay, it is true that your CD-ROM came out before Microsoft's. The fact is that Britannica passed on Gates' offer and had no clue how to sell a CD-ROM. So describing it as an urban myth is misleading, at best.
"Making life difficult is only going to drive those legitimate customer prospects towards the very activity they were most afraid of."
I’m sure there are people who rationalize their downloading illegal copies this way. I’ve seen Mike use this line more and more often, of late, and feel that in some way he is providing cover for “pirates”.
If I can’t get what I want, when I want it, at a price I’m willing to pay then I go without. I’d rather see Mike reference lost of market size and market share rather than increasing pressure to “pirate” as the main penalty for treating one’s customers like criminals.
I'm a little bummed out about it but I'm boycotting the NFL until they stop attacking Fair Use. The real drag for me is that I finally got my wife educated enough on the game that she could enjoy watching them with me. :-(
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by dataGuy.