Jay 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (4815) comment rss

  • On the post: MPAA Exec: Only We Can Make Content That People Want

    Jay ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2012 @ 08:53am

    Still using misinformation

    The MPAA, on the other hand, regularly made up claims out of thin air -- such as the supposed 2.2 million people this would effect. The industry employs less than 400,000, and many of them have nothing to do with the copyright/royalties side of the business.

    Chris Dodd used this as recently as the Attorney General meeting and I'm still amazed that he's gotten away with it. No one has had a public debate with him and this 2.2 million jobs number. It's beyond ridiculous. Also, these "industries" don't create, nor do they represent creator interests. That's the problem here. I look at these people and *all* of them represent gatekeepers who have no interest in what people want. They don't know how to enable access, merely limit progress. We need to remove the bottle out of their mouths and let them cry it out. No more government teat. If they want to have a "rational discussion" it's time for them to recognize that no one is interested in their spoiled temper tantrums.

    And I for one know that I'm voting out the politicians that enable them.

  • On the post: AT&T Threatens To Cut Off Phone Service For Guy Who Beat Them In Small Claims Court Over Throttling

    Jay ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2012 @ 12:57am

    Re: I'm confused

    The US doesn't. The problem is that AT&T essentially owns the market on landlines, kills small businesses, and we're left with four major choices for cell phones in the US.

    So if you want actual good service, you'll have to take your phone elsewhere. It kind of sucks but we need to fix that 2006 ruling that allows AT&T along with TWC not to share DSL lines.

  • On the post: AT&T Threatens To Cut Off Phone Service For Guy Who Beat Them In Small Claims Court Over Throttling

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 10:21pm

    Re:

    Who gives a damn when it's his plan that he's paying for? Why should he change plans so that AT&T charges him even more?

  • On the post: AT&T Threatens To Cut Off Phone Service For Guy Who Beat Them In Small Claims Court Over Throttling

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 10:04pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    They're too busy buying the FCC to disallow competition to be bothered by things like customer service.

  • On the post: AT&T Threatens To Cut Off Phone Service For Guy Who Beat Them In Small Claims Court Over Throttling

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 10:03pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    A

  • On the post: Does Anyone Who Develops New Products In Hollywood Ask 'Would I Ever Actually Use This?'

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 02:22pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Because girls in games, like cake, are a lie.

  • On the post: Thinking Of Copyright As Property Is As Natural As Thinking Of Smells As Property

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 01:31pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    If the producers make what people want, then they reap the rewards. Copyright doesn't change that fact.

  • On the post: Does Anyone Who Develops New Products In Hollywood Ask 'Would I Ever Actually Use This?'

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 12:08pm

    Frustration 9001

    The part that should really infuriate people? I'm pretty sure that whatever money is lost on this ridiculous scheme will be received in tax savings for the business. So they will complain aboutabout consumers not wanting to deal with this money scam, but them not learn about what the market actually wants.

  • On the post: Thinking Of Copyright As Property Is As Natural As Thinking Of Smells As Property

    Jay ( profile ), 14 Mar, 2012 @ 10:34am

    Re:

    Sure, some did. They just didn't have access to a government hell-bent on destroying social freedoms.

  • On the post: Megaupload Negotiating To Let US Gov't Officials (And Everyone Else) Retrieve Their Legit Files That Were Taken Down

    Jay ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2012 @ 07:11pm

    Re:

    What should scare you more is that there are 20 people with the power to take down websites...

  • On the post: Valve's Comprehensive Strategy Shows How To Go From Fee To Free… And Increase Revenue Twelve-fold

    Jay ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2012 @ 01:18pm

    Re:

    I'd be what you consider a Valve fanboy.

    But I have to keep it real and honest about Valve. They do some things wrong. They quickly make up for it while doing what the community wants.

    They have dedicated servers for people to buy at cheeap rates. This means that even if you're an evil douchebag player, you get to see more ads because you're a negative externality elsewhere.

    If you're a good player that gives to the community in a number of ways, they give you free weapons.

    If you create weapons, you have ways to be supported by the Steam community if you put up a good design that the community enjoys.

    If you do things such as the Female Scout update, they love you long time.

    Basically, what they've done is build a community of people that add value to the game. Sure, it's four years old. But to the people playing Valve games, they've serviced it so that the community continues to support the games, the personalities, and the players who have found tremendous value in keeping the game going.

    Of course, there are still downsides... But as a Valve fanboy, let's ignore those while I gleam the good side of a great company. :)

  • On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years

    Jay ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2012 @ 12:21am

    Re: Re: Re: Gotta give her some credit...

    I wasn't trying to refute your statement. I was adding to it. But I would say that they are more cunning, if anything. Doesn't take much to look at the at the tax code and make loopholes.

  • On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years

    Jay ( profile ), 13 Mar, 2012 @ 12:20am

    Re: Re: Re: Gotta give her some credit...

    I wasn't trying to refute your statement. I was adding to it. But I would say that they are more cunning, if anything. Doesn't take much to look at the at the tax code and make loopholes.

  • On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years

    Jay ( profile ), 12 Mar, 2012 @ 06:48pm

    Re: Gotta give her some credit...

    No, I'm pretty sure the rules of bankruptcy weren't followed. CEO pays have been getting very outrageous, paying the CEOs for failing in their job. It's the same as saying Mitt Romney is going to do a great job as president because his background is in "business."

    He wouldn't know what the free market if it bit him on the ass. The problem with Bain Capital is that it relies on tax loopholes in federal laws to make money.

    Mitt Romney used "leveraged buy-outs" which is explained as thus:

    The leveraged buy-out firm will put down a fraction of the cost of buying an ailing company. The balance of the transaction is borrowed, but the debt goes onto the books of the target company, not the private equity firm ? the struggling company basically finances the lion's share of its own sale.

    The target company's debt payments increase significantly, and those debt payments are then written off, reducing its tax burden significantly. This subsidy increases short-term revenues ? at the expense of long-term debt ? and that, in turn, is paid out in dividends to Bain's investors and a fat stream of management fees that Romney and his partners skimmed off the top.

    To get back on topic, there are CEOs that will cause a company to fail intentionally. But the company will lay off workers and make sure to pay the CEO even though their direction lead to the failing of the company. It's quite ridiculous, but even judges (as my previous post in this section can attest) will allow these rules instead of reject them for the business failing.

  • On the post: NYT Pays Former CEO $24 Million To Go Away; The Paper Made $3 Million Total Over The Last 4 Years

    Jay ( profile ), 12 Mar, 2012 @ 06:37pm

    Re: Re: Early but expensive pullout reward

    Pretty much.

    This has been going on since the 70s. But if you want to see bankruptcy bonuses, the reporters at the WSJ have the best story about how disproportionate it is.

  • On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt

    Jay ( profile ), 11 Mar, 2012 @ 01:10pm

    Addition to Rich's assessment

    I'd like to add to this by stating I've been looking at the DoJ's budget requests for 2013. It's quite disturbing that more attention isn't being paid to what the DoJ is asking for.

    2013 Budget

    Look at the prisoners and detentions and you'll see the problem that I see with their requests:

    $8.6 billion for federal prisons and detention
    --$141.2 million in Program Increases (4.5% increase from 2012)
    --$223.9 million in prison and detention adjustments to maintain current services
    -- $141.2 million for program increases to ensure prisoners are confined in secure facilities and to improve prisoner reentry
    $6.8 billion to Bureau of Prisons
    4.1% increase ($268.9 million) from 2012


    This seems like a bit much to ask for when crime rates are still falling by the FBI's standards.

    But of course, the devil is in the details. As I looked at the budget request, I saw two new prisons being opened as well as $22 million dollars for 210 correctional officers.

    Even to me that seems quite exorbitant and there's been nothing discussed about how out of touch our laws are to other countries. Also consider that prison guards make more than those with Harvard degrees. We've put so much money into detentions that something has to give.

    Now let's get to the actual prisons:


    $55.5 million
    activation of two prisons, U.S. Penitentiary Yazoo City, MS (1,216 beds), and FCI Hazelton, WV (1,280 beds)
    $25.8 million to procure 1,000 new contract beds
    $59.9 million in program increases - federal detention to pay for increases in the average daily detainee population and inflationary increases for detention related costs.


    This is the aspect that I saw that was most puzzling and I doubt many lawmakers would notice it.

    They're activating two new prisons, and procuring 1000 new beds. Last I checked, beds in prison were not Tempur-pedic. So they pay for extra expenses such as transport and gas... But what happens to the extra funds? Why does each bed cost $25,800 for each prison mate?
    And why is our government itching to put more people in jail even though there is so little return on investment? Well, the big return is to the private prisons industry. Arizona has had story after story about the prisons. But it's not alone. The same story keeps playing out about how crony capitalism has taken over and those in charge don't represent the people's interest. Hell, even judges have gotten involved!

    The point here is that the DoJ is overreaching by a lot. They're requesting money they don't need to and there is a ton of evidence that the money will be used to expand on all forms of law, make more people guilty before being found innocent and imprison people such as Anonymous to punish them for victimless crimes with mandatory sentencing.

    This isn't justice that law enforcement is looking for.

    It's a plutocratic system that is going to war with America's citizens.

  • On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week

    Jay ( profile ), 10 Mar, 2012 @ 11:44pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Most Republicans are horrid and they represent the monied interest of the ones paying their bills. It's ridiculous how hyperpolarized they've become that they want to suggest war in Iran even though most of the country doesn't want war.

    The direct problem that needs fixing is electoral reform. We need a way to punish political parties for being too focused on the needs of a small segment of the US culture.

    I could care less if there are people that want a Socialist country or a Communist America. So long as they aren't the majority, that shouldn't happen. Yet our democracy is mixed with special interests on a massive level and the 538 delegates are a horrid mix of barriers to individual liberties. Our law makers moved to the authoritarian right since the 1980s. And it's not by accident. When the marching orders are to try to help special interests over the American people, you know there's a problem.

  • On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week

    Jay ( profile ), 10 Mar, 2012 @ 03:48pm

    Re: Re: Re:

    Remember, there is merely one party running everything in Congress. You want representatives? I'd say flush them all out. Then take the money out of Congress. Then make electoral reform a necessity. No, this does not mean vote all Democrat nor all Republican. If you vote all Democrat, SOPA will be passed next year. Focus on the politics, get everyone to vote for people that have middle class issues, then get electoral reform on the ballot.

  • On the post: Ltlw0lf's Favorite Techdirt Posts of the Week

    Jay ( profile ), 10 Mar, 2012 @ 02:02pm

    Re:

    I'm pretty sure that those machines and their problems have been around since 2000. I'm willing to bet that they won't be fixed by election time. It's a waste of time and money that these things come out and people can hack them far more quickly than the problems solved.

  • On the post: DailyDirt: Epic Fail In Advertising

    Jay ( profile ), 10 Mar, 2012 @ 07:08am

    Re: Rush was right

    Sandra Fluke was an activist who went to a Catholic college to get the government to force them to go against their beliefs. This is not about contraception, it`s about government coercion. Obama and his media stooges has reframed this a "war on women".

    I keep hearing this... No, it's been about women's health concerns and the Republicans have been on the wrong side of this issue. It should be about a woman having a conversation with their doctor. It's about a woman being able to testify to Congress about what contraceptives help her do (education, working, etc) without having religious nuts come in with a morality plea that somehow she's a shameful human being for taking contraceptives.

    First, I doubt you've read anything in regards to this issue. A friend had to have an ovary removed because she couldn't take contraceptives on the Jesuit Georgetown campus. Her friend was gay so pregnancy was not an issue in this regard. She also discusses other issues where women have to take contraception irregularly simply because it's not enough.

    What the Georgetown campus does not cover, it makes very good economic sense for the insurance companies to cover. In fact, that is a VERY good policy in allowing women to get out of the home and pursue their own economic pursuits. So much so, that the Catholic Health Association endorsed the individual mandate that the Heritage Foundation made so long ago.

    In short, this "controversy" has been about access. Nothing more. There's no sense of entitlement but trying to find a way to better the women on the Georgetown campus that don't have much in the way of healthcare needs.

Next >>