Ehud Gavron’s Techdirt Profile


About Ehud GavronTechdirt Insider

Ehud Gavron’s Comments comment rss

  • Oct 4th, 2015 @ 4:42pm

    TPP very much alive

  • Oct 2nd, 2015 @ 11:44am

    Faming the guilty

    When a terrorist event occurs in Israel they report the details and the next day mortar and cement shows up to replace the rubble.

    Here we build monuments to terror, raze schools to the ground, and play the terrorist's name endlessly, showcasing them, their manifesto, and their family.

    Perhaps it's time to take a lesson from our allies across the pond and quit turning the terror circus spigot on at a moment's notice for cheap and tawdry ratings.

    When TV networks stopped showing streakers at baseball games the habit stopped -- nobody got famous for it, just arrested. Naked.

    This was in a gun-free zone.
    The whole United States is a crime-free zone.
    Drugs are sold in drug-free zones.
    Legislation won't solve this. Public attitude will.

    My sympathies for the families.

  • Sep 28th, 2015 @ 7:34pm

    Reason for regulations...

    Regulations are sometimes couched as being required for safety, and the inevitable tradeoff between what you can't do and someone else's safety trotted out center stage.

    Then sometimes it's just the government exercising more control because it can. This is an example of the latter -- Colombia has effectively made flying drones a violation of several civil regulations. That means if you upset someone you will get fined and the government will be enriched.

    No matter how corrupt or inept our government is, I'm happy that the US FAA takes a more laissez faire approach until something becomes an exigent danger. Their process, which includes NPRMs, hearings, etc. is more reasoned than the European or South American or Colombian methods.

    Commercial Rotorcraft Pilot

  • Sep 25th, 2015 @ 3:54pm

    Bullying (begging the question)

    It appears that "Bullying" in 2015 is "Anything one doesn't like."

    I'd quote the OED but I don't want to be bullying the author of this great article nor the readers of the comments.


  • Sep 17th, 2015 @ 2:13am

    type: ausrian

    "Ausrian Commercial Court" could use another "t".

  • Sep 11th, 2015 @ 5:18pm

    Anonymous Coward makes up stuff

    No. College campuses are not made up of the systems and processes to properly evaluate a legal claim, investigate it, and then lead to a conclusion.

    That is why most of them will hand these things off to a law enforcement agency to do a proper (legal) investigation and follow it up. A LACK of a charge and a LACK of a conviction is not a failure of the process.

    Here's an article with statistics about 80% of the claims being false:

    Here's another story about made up campus rape:

    The assumption that a "student is ignored" is a false one. There's nothing in any primary source indicating the student was ignored. There were no criminal convictions in this matter. Anything else is pure speculation... and a prejudging of the other victim -- the alleged sexual assaulter.

    The other assumption that someone "barely 3 months out of high school" gets to have magic-bullet rights is ludicrous. Take another look at the 14th Amendment. If you're a US Citizen you have EQUAL PROTECTION UNDER THE LAW. There's no magic bullet for being "3 months out of high school." Maturity is expected and legally granted at 18 years.

    The article doesn't fail on cyanide sales. The article correctly points out that the LAWSUIT FAILS by conflating the cyanide sale with the suicidal teen with the sexual assault. The lawsuit is defective because the reason for the suicide is unproven BUT arguendo is irrelevant to the matter of the purchase of the cyanide.


  • Sep 11th, 2015 @ 2:25pm

    Red Herring

    This case is about a mother hurt so badly because she wasn't available to her suicidal daughter, that she wants to sue everybody.

    I'm sorry her daughter felt she had nobody to turn to. Likely if her mommy had been available... there would be no lawsuit today.

    However, from a legal point of view...

    I know it's tough for people outside the United States to understand but we here have laws. Part of those laws is that everyone is innocent until proven guilty in a court of law.

    When we say "we don't blame the victim" this is true of those who report alleged assault as well as the person they report about.

    In this case there is no conviction. That means NOBODY is guilty of sexually assaulting her.

    That sexual assault thing is a red herring. This case is about mommy suing Amazon because butthurt.

    It is NOT germane to Amazon being named in the lawsuit as to WHY the girl was allegedly suicidal. The whole "sexual assault" thing and suing the University is just an attempt to get more bites at the insurance-coverage umbrella-policy cash apple.

    Simplifying, these are two unrelated cases thrown into one:
    1. Nobody was found guilty of sexual assault but mommy thinks university should have moved the alleged perpetrator to a different dorm (or killed him?). Scott Greenfield writes about this horrid non-justice phenomenon at Basically universities are creating extrajudicial proceedings lacking justice, fairness, protection of rights, and allow the accused to be vilified while the accuser has free reign without regard to law or evidence.

    But this did not happen here. Nobody was found guilty of sexual assault. Any discussion of sexual assault is an attack against the victim of these accusations.

    2. An adult went on and purchased a product. Amazon is not responsible that the adult later used that product to kill herself. The depressed teen could have bought a Ghost 400 crossbow, a sharp kitchen knife, or Tide With Bleach and Windex and made mustard gas. The only responsible person for her death is... the teen.

    If her mother would like to find someone living to point the finger at... she should look in the mirror. Obviously this poor teenager felt she was assaulted (but the law did not agree with her conclusion) and she felt she had nobody to turn to (I guess Mommy wasn't so ever reachable)... and that she couldn't live with the guilt or shame and so she spent DAYS buying a product, waiting for it to be delivered, getting it, and using it.

    There's suicide through depression. That happens instantly. There's suicide through PLANNED death. That's what this teenager did.

    Mommy should get help. She has no case against any of the parties... and this won't make her feel better for how badly she failed her daughter.

    I'm sorry an eighteen year old girl felt everything was so hopeless and she bought cyanide and killed herself.

    The only person responsible for that is the girl. Not Amazon. Not the university. Not some guy that was not found to have assaulted her.

    Sometimes justice is not fair. But it is just.


  • Sep 9th, 2015 @ 12:32pm


    ...why should you? People using that site knew what they were doing, and that it involved risk. The risk of negative consequences for being caught cheating is as old as cheating itself...

    Very well said.


  • Aug 21st, 2015 @ 7:50pm

    I guess

    he really got under their ̶a̶r̶m̶o̶u̶r̶ skin.

  • Aug 19th, 2015 @ 9:27pm

    Reading the article helps!

    The article at the top of this page is insightful in its research, fascinating in its composition, and eloquently constructed. You who have come to here, the bottom comment, to see what people are still talking about should jump back up there and read it.

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. You can't help but get that understanding from reading the article.

    The article is not about the show. Like the show, hate the show, it's still not about the show.

    There are many many forums to discuss the show. This is not one. Coming here to discuss the show is like overhearing someone saying "the parm is cheesy" and walking right to their dinner table, plopping your fat ass down, and saying "I love to play parcheesi!" and no matter how much they try and be polite and explain that no, we're just eating really cheesy parm you insist on staying, talking about parcheesi, and calling them rude for not listening to you.

    Etiquette is important, and being tone-deaf to the dozens of people who have said "this is not about the show" reflects well on this forum that censors noone and on those who show courtesy and civility in the face of blatant disregard for all manners.

    I close by adding one more thing. The article at the top (you *did* read it, right?) is about Walter O'Brien being a fraud. It is now about who YOU are or how old you are nor is it about me.

    You shall not pass -- Gandalf

  • Aug 19th, 2015 @ 3:36pm

    The troll comment

    ISPs shouldn't have to bear the cost of troll's fishing expeditions. If troll wants ISPs to do research for it, troll should pay ISPs to do research for it.

    This prevents ISPs from being the VICTIMS of troll's greed.

  • Aug 17th, 2015 @ 9:40am


    Yes, microwaves. It's a word people throw out as a lifeline to sinking sailors. Sadly the word is so obsolete because almost everything we do with radios now *is* microwaves.

    Any frequency between 300MHz (100cm wavelength) and 300GHz (0.1cm wavelength) is a microwave frequency.

    That includes every WiFi and Bluetooth device you have. It even includes those old 900MHz phones you threw out when you upgraded to DECT. Even garage door openers - the dumbest radio devices out there - are in the microwave band (315MHz).

    You don't have to get gear from Ubiquiti (although I use their gear and like it) or Motorola's Canopy (although I've used that and like it) or ...

    Pringles-can antennas and standard WiFi will work great. Or there's always the Ubiquiti radios.

    But "Microwave" is not the answer. It's a fact.

  • Aug 17th, 2015 @ 9:22am

    There is no Internet Backbone

    The original program started in 1985 and back then the US portion of the Internet was the NSFnet and it did have one backbone. In 1993 the commercial Internet started and then there were multiple backbones.

    Today there are unrelated long-distance fiber-optic Internet connections that link all sorts of cities and data centers. There is no "backbone" and there are no "backbones". All there are are tier-1 carriers, their links, and their interconnections.

    Here, for example, is how AT&T transits IPv4 traffic to other providers. Note how many they are connected to. That means any traffic to or from those other providers are immediately shunted off AT&Ts network at the closest peering points. If you follow those other providers to their providers, peers, and customers, you'll see that the Internet of today --unlike 1985 or 1993 or 2002-- is very much just a spiderweb of interconnected networks.


    Disclosure: I've been responsible for providing Internet service since 1992 (yes, before the commercial Internet).


  • Aug 15th, 2015 @ 7:35pm


    Fiber-optic circuits don't ever supply power as parent says.

    Aerial fiber (/ outdoor fiber) includes a ground conductor (copper) so that the $11/hr kid with the spray paint can detect it in the street.

    No power is *ever* delivered on any FO circuit I'm aware of anywhere in the US.

    He who asserts must prove.


  • Aug 14th, 2015 @ 4:27pm

    (untitled comment)

    He who asserts must prove. I didn't write this story and it's not my burden to prove it's false. Putting it on me is a good example of the burden of proof fallacy.

    Your comments are usually the top (or second) in the best of the week. Better luck with the next one :)

    P.S. I do have other reasons than Occam's... but for now we'll let this marinate as is.

  • Aug 14th, 2015 @ 3:07pm


    I called BS on this on the Ars forum and I call it BS here.

    Karl, did you do any research? Did you contact Schneider? Did you contact Windstream?

    If you took the ten minutes to reach out you'd find out there is a lot of smoke and no fire.

    How do I know this? Occam's razor.

    He who asserts must prove... and I find no proof (or pudding) in either Arstechnica's wive's tale or this retelling over a fireside chat with honey meade of the same tale.


  • Aug 14th, 2015 @ 2:53pm

    Too much fun for Wlater O'Brien the fraud

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud, and it's funny to see his supporters jump in here and ignore that the article is NOT about the TV SHOW. Surprised, right?

    Then there are those who want to denigrate the posters on this forum. We have too much time. We're obsessed. We are socially inept. Except, of course, that by posting on this forum that same denigration applies to the poster.

    Walter O'Brien is a fraud. His company is built on selling his fraudulent reputation. In an alternate world hypothetically speaking if he had died of a bad mosquito bite at birth, NOTHING would be safer, or better, except the TV show might have been affected. Good thing we're not talking about that, right?

    Thank you, Anonymous Coward. Both your first name and last name are 100% correct. You are a coward. For you will not put your lackluster reputation behind your brilliant twit:
    > Wow [comma missing] someone has way too much time on their hands! Um [fragment]

    Fortunately this shall not detract from the ultimate thread on how Walter O'Brien is a fraud. I hear that's now trending on google. In my opinion honesty is a good thing.

    Ehud Gavron
    Tucson AZ

  • Aug 12th, 2015 @ 10:31am

    Typo/Freudian slip?

    The first sentence is missing an ending.

    "Eric Goldman Brings news that... another defamation lawsuit[]".


  • Aug 6th, 2015 @ 10:50pm

    SLAPPed down

    Put a fork in it, Louie. She's a done.


  • Aug 6th, 2015 @ 5:54pm

    the links

    If you look at the Levy Response PDF there are links. Sadly, because a)scribd sucks (really, I have to join to download?) and b)the original doc was scanned without OCR... they are not live links.

    Here you go:
    PDF P1/4 para1

    PDF P3/4 para4 dont-publish-th.html

    And the best summary of all of this: gus-cease-desist-calling-lots-attention-to-statements-about-him.shtml


More comments from Ehud Gavron >>