OldMugwump 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1110) comment rss

  • On the post: Because The Defense Department's Secure Communications Options Don't Work For Everyone, Soldiers Are Turning To Signal And WhatsApp

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 28 Jan, 2022 @ 10:21am

    Is there a real problem here or an imagainary one?

    And there appears to be no fix on the immediate horizon. The Defense Department is quick to point out the use of Signal and WhatsApp violates regulations

    Yes, it violates regs, but it's secure and apparently works fine.

    The problem here is imaginary paperwork made-up problems.

  • On the post: US Court To Gruyere Cheese People: No, You Can't Ban People From Calling Their Cheese Gruyere If They Aren't Your Neighbors

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 15 Jan, 2022 @ 10:19am

    As a consumer...

    there's a vast difference between "Gruyere cheese" and "Gruyere-style cheeese".

    The former I'd assume was made in Gruyere to the local standard. The latter is a similar kind of cheese made somewhere else.

    Sort of like the difference between "chocolate" (acutal chocolate) and "choclatey" (anything brown and sweet).

    I guess I'm an extreme moderate here. I'm fine with saving the regional names, but adding "-style" seems clear enough to me to legitimately distingish other things.

  • On the post: Top Disney Lawyer To Become Top Copyright Office Lawyer, Because Who Cares About The Public Interest?

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 08 Jan, 2022 @ 06:53pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: same old song

    The 7 million number is the total of C and S corporations in the US - it doesn't count LLCs, partnerships, or sole proprietorships (tho to be fair the 2 "corporations" I own are both LLCs - I own them for the sole purpose of privacy; I don't want people to be able to look up in public records who owns a house I'm building for my retirement. So a LLC owns the house.) When you start with 7 million corporations, it doesn't take a big percentage to for "a great many" to "go for the profit". My point being that the overwhelming majority of private corporations do in fact behave morally, as that's what the people who own and run them want to do and correctly believe is in their own long-term interest. If a few thousand corporations ("a great many") do otherwise, it's far from fair to blame the other 99.9% that are honest and moral. I'll say again - private corporations are no more, and no less, moral than the people who own and run them. Most people are fully aware that crime, immorality, and cheating do not pay in the long run. And so they run their businesses honestly out of simple self interest. A few exceptions run by monsters don't make that false. I fully agree that, like most things, this is far more complex than most everyone thinks. I also agree with SDM's implication that there are bad actors out there and flaws in our legal systems which allow them to get away with things they ought not to (again see some examples at https://mugwumpery.com/?p=565 ). But those bad actors are rare exceptions - most private corporations are honest and moral. It is in their interest to be so. It is outrageously unjust to claim that the very structure that allows people to cooperate toward shared goals is "inherently amoral". That is simply false.

  • On the post: Top Disney Lawyer To Become Top Copyright Office Lawyer, Because Who Cares About The Public Interest?

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 07 Jan, 2022 @ 06:15pm

    Re: Re: Re: same old song

    I'm sorry you feel that way SDM. When you say "private corporations are inherently amoral", you are painting with an extremely broad brush. In 2020 there were approximately 7 million private corporations in the US alone. I personally own 2 of those and am a major investor (> 10% ownership) in 2 others. One of them I have worked at for the last 15 years. I assure you that the private corporations I own and work at are not amoral. Techdirt, where you so often post, is also probably a private corporation. I don't know who owns it (probably Mike Masnick is among the major owners), but I highly doubt Techdirt would "gladly traffic children if doing so would get them better margins this quarter". Corporations are nothing more, and nothing less, than groups of people cooperating together to pursue some activity - usually, but not always, a money-making business. They are as moral, amoral, or immoral as the people who own and run them. Do you think when people cooperate they suddenly and magically become amoral? Do you think it's inherently bad for people to cooperate? I don't. Go pick up a trade journal in any narrow industry - say, semiconductors, dry cleaning, or plastic bag manufacturing. Look at the ads and articles. They're all focused on delivering real value and real service - hundreds of private corporations, some small and others large, all working hard to offer better products to their industry. You'll see no signs of deception or fraud - acting that way destroys the reputation that private corporations live on and they know that well. Don't judge the millions of private corporations around the world based on the misdeeds of a dozen or two headline-making miscreants. Sure, some corporations are amoral and run by bastards - in particular I've noticed a strong correlation between amorality and management by MBA-holding professional managers who are not major owners. Family-owned private corporations (probably the majority of all corporations, BTW) tend to have excellent morals. (As I've said before, the purpose of MBA programs seems to be to train any naturally occurring morality out of the students.) Regulatory capture is a real and very common thing. Attempts to regulate particular industries are virtually always captured by the regulated industry. This is natural; they have the most interest and most expertise on the subject. Once captured, regulations usually end up imposing rules that look good to outsiders and are bearable by large well-established firms, but which form an impassible barrier for new and small firms. (Funny, that.) That doesn't happen when the general and ancient rules of honest dealing are enforced by governments and courts - requirements to honor contracts, to deliver fair value, to advertise truthfully, to avoid harm to 3rd parties and compensate anyone whose rights are infringed by their activities, etc., etc. The whole economy of millions of businesses in hundreds of different industries is too diverse, has too many competing interests, and is too uncoordinated to "capture" the broad system of laws and courts. That isn't the case when narrow industry-specific regulations are imposed. As I've said before, I think the general rules of fair dealing are mostly insufficiently enforced, and construed more narrowly than they ought to be (e.g. https://mugwumpery.com/?p=565 ). But regulations usually only make things worse by empowering industries to keep out competitors. But, please, don't tar all the millions of private corporations with the broad brush of amorality. Yes, there are a few criminals in every country - but most of us are honest.

  • On the post: Top Disney Lawyer To Become Top Copyright Office Lawyer, Because Who Cares About The Public Interest?

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 06 Jan, 2022 @ 02:03pm

    Re: same old song

    The point of regulation is to (a) satisfy those who think private firms are inherently evil and need restraint over and above the ordinary rules of honest business (honor contracts, don't mislead, don't steal, don't lie, don't screw people, etc.), while (b) ensuring that the industry is successful and profitable (whether it deserves to be or not), and (c) providing a mechanism to erect barriers to entry to new firms who'd like to lower prices or innovate, which could lead to existing players seeing reduced profit or a lot of work.

  • On the post: Hey The North Face! When You Said Sending Us A Bogus Trademark Threat Was A Mistake, We Believed You; So Why Did You Do It Again?

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 27 Dec, 2021 @ 10:28am

    And most important

    WHY aren't they liable for all that time they're making you waste based on their baseless claims?

    Why doesn't the law impose ANY penalties on those making baseless claims?

  • On the post: Report Showcases How Elon Musk Undermined His Own Engineers And Endangered Public Safety

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 09 Dec, 2021 @ 08:11am

    Re: Re: Elon is right about everything

    Imperfect as Autopilot is (and it is imperfect; I have 2 Teslas), it appears to be nonetheless safer than the average human driver. The bottom line is number of accidents per mile driven - Teslas generally, and Autopilot specifically, have less accidents that average cars. Ref: https://www.tesla.com/VehicleSafetyReport So the article and Musk attacks seem pretty unfair - sure, nothing's perfect, but surely "better" is an improvement to be praised.

  • On the post: Twitter Is Just The Beginning Of Jack Dorsey's Speech Revolution

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 04 Dec, 2021 @ 07:55am

    Um

    Dorsey has been more supportive of free speech than many on the American political left ̶m̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ . Fixed. Dorsey has been more supportive of free speech than many on the American political center ̶m̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ . Fixed. Dorsey has been more supportive of free speech than many ̶m̶i̶g̶h̶t̶ ̶t̶h̶i̶n̶k̶ . Fixed. Somebody's partisan blindness is showing.

  • On the post: Minneapolis Man Acquitted Of Charges After Mistakenly Shooting At Cops Sues Officers For Violating His Rights

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 20 Nov, 2021 @ 12:13pm

    It should be a felony...

    ...for a police officer on duty to intentionally turn off, disable, or cover a body camera.

  • On the post: DEA Racks Up Two Forfeiture Losses In One Week, Returns $100,000 In Stolen Cash To Victims

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 17 Nov, 2021 @ 07:21am

    Warren was represented pro bono by the Institute for Justice

    https://ij.org

    ...they could use your help.

  • On the post: Canon Sued For Disabling Printer Scanners When Devices Run Out Of Ink

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2021 @ 10:23am

    Capitalists suck donkey balls

    ...as I've said somewhere before, capitalists suck donkey balls, but capitalism doesn’t have to. (Adam Smith said something similar in 1776.)

    The issue is disclosure. If the printer vendors clearly disclosed what the customer is getting, they'd (a) drive customers to other vendors who'll treat them better and (b) be so embarrassed for their reputation that they'd stop this.

    Regulators need to enforce disclosure and prohibit misleading claims, not specify what vendors must offer. Unfortunately, they don't.

    FWIW, this is why I switched from Canon to Brother (and lately Epson) years ago. Neither is perfect, but they're better.

  • On the post: Sixth Circuit Reaffirms It's A Fourth Amendment Violation To Chalk Car Tires For Parking Enforcement Purposes

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 09 Sep, 2021 @ 08:59pm

    Re: They would never store this data on insecure servers, would

    I hope they'd store it on insecure servers. I hope they'd make it publicly available to everyone in real time. What happens in public is...public. If the government is going to install surveillance cameras in public places, the public should be able to look through them. And access any recordings. That ensures the police can't cherry pick what they use in court and that misdeeds by authorities are recorded and on the record, as well as by citizens. I'll be far more worried if the police collect video and the public isn't allowed to see it - just the cops.

  • On the post: New Hampshire PD's Recruitment Pitch Lists Qualified Immunity As A Job Perk

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2021 @ 09:15am

    Re: same flaws as regular humans

    I wish more people understood that. If it's morally wrong for you to do it, it's morally wrong for the government to do it. Making it legal doesn't change morality.

  • On the post: New Hampshire PD's Recruitment Pitch Lists Qualified Immunity As A Job Perk

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2021 @ 09:13am

    Re: 'We deeply apologize for our temporary honesty.'

    Still, at least they were embarrassed about it. That's something - people are only embarrassed about their behavior when they know something is morally wrong.

  • On the post: Oklahoma Deputies Steal $141,500 From Men Trying To Buy Land, Manage To Make $10,000 Of It Disappear

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2021 @ 06:28am

    Re: But DRUUUUUGS!

    Given some of the people who hang around here, I suppose this is necessary: For you dummies: /sarc

  • On the post: Oklahoma Deputies Steal $141,500 From Men Trying To Buy Land, Manage To Make $10,000 Of It Disappear

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2021 @ 06:26am

    But DRUUUUUGS!

    You dummies, DRUGS ARE BAD!

    Only by turning the police into criminals can we stop DRUG ABUSERS from STEALING to get the DRUG MONEY they need for the BLACK MARKET!!!

    STEALING is BAD!! We must maintain the black market in drugs so that cartels can stay rich and afford all those expensive weapons!! Otherwise ADDICTS!!!!!

    You dummies are dumb!

  • On the post: Social Network GETTR, Which Promised To Support 'Free Speech' Now Full Of Islamic State Jihadi Propaganda

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 03 Aug, 2021 @ 11:19am

    There is an alternative to censorship

    Instead of "removing" content, you can just label it and offer filters based on the labels, so that those who aren't interested don't have to see it.

    (Of course accurate labelling is a difficult problem in itself; but it's not the same as the censorship problem.)

  • On the post: Elon Musk's Pointless, Subsidized Tunnels Head To Flood-Prone Florida

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2021 @ 09:44am

    Re: Re: Let him build it with his own money

    "people like Musk" <> "Musk". But perhaps you already knew that. If so, I apologize.

  • On the post: Elon Musk's Pointless, Subsidized Tunnels Head To Flood-Prone Florida

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 08 Jul, 2021 @ 10:36pm

    Let him build it with his own money

    If Mr. Musk wants to build Florida tunnels with his own, or investor's money - by all means, cheer him on. Maybe he can deliver another miracle (don't discount a guy who can land two 50 meter tall rockets simultaneously when NASA has never landed even one). I can't embed phtoos here but https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacex/2019/06/25/side-boosters-have-landed/

    Taxpayer money, no.

    Yes, Musk has a habit of picking up large sums of money the government leaves on the ground. But he's just picking them up - it's our elected officials who drop it there.

  • On the post: Fuck This Cheer In Particular Says The Supreme Court In Decision Upholding Students' Free Speech Rights

    OldMugwump ( profile ), 29 Jun, 2021 @ 06:44am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Liberalism vs conservatism?

    I agree more parties is better. With first-past-the-post that's hard, tho. I'm just saying that ONE is really scary. (Godwin wins again...)

Next >>