Gracey 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (109) comment rss

  • On the post: PissedConsumer Fights Back Against Roca Labs' Attempt To Silence Customer Complaints

    Gracey ( profile ), 22 Sep, 2014 @ 07:49pm

    huh.

    Well, even though I know the wiki isn't exactly "always right" in this case, I think they might be:

    [quote] The term "nutraceutical" has no meaning in US law [/quote]

    Seems appropriate.

  • On the post: 'Dietary Supplement' Company Tries Suing PissedConsumer, Citing Buyer's Agreement To Never Say Anything Negative

    Gracey ( profile ), 08 Sep, 2014 @ 03:02pm

    [quote]PissedConsumer urges angry consumers to complain that the company is "tortiously interfering" with Roca's business[/quote]

    No. Roca's unfounded claims and poor products are interfering with their business.

    Maybe they should just sue themselves.

  • On the post: UK Culture Secretary: Search Engines Must Magically Stop Piracy Or Else!

    Gracey ( profile ), 03 Sep, 2014 @ 09:12am

    Really?

    All this deserves is just a great big smiley ROFL ...

    Can't think of anything else that's appropriate to the idea of search engines actually stopping piracy. Nor anyone else for that matter ... 'bout the same as when they tried to stop booze during prohibition. How did that work for them?

  • On the post: Google Bans Disconnect.me App From Play Store Based On Vague Guidelines

    Gracey ( profile ), 02 Sep, 2014 @ 05:39pm

    Google doesn't ban adblockers. If it did ... there would be several other apps unavailable. It's not about adblocking.

    Since the developer of the app is an ex-Googler, there may be something in that ... like any chance of the disconnect app violating the terms of use that every user of a google service agrees to?

    The very vague reference in the email they sent doesn't say very much, but it probably isn't about ad blocking in total, if it includes that at all.

    And from this story:

    http://blogs.wsj.com/digits/2014/08/28/why-some-privacy-apps-get-blocked-from-the-android-play-store/

    "Google has banned similar ad-blocking apps before because they, too, could interfere with other apps. “When we were kicked out, virtually every other ad blocker was kicked out as well,” said Ben Williams a spokesman for Eyeo, maker of Adblock Plus, which was removed from the Play store in March 2013."

    Except AdBlock is still available in the google play store. And so is AdBlock+ ... meaning it isn't about adblocker, and an ex-googler ought to know that.

  • On the post: Rightscorp's New PR Plan: The More Ridiculous It Gets (Such As By Claiming To Hijack Browsers), The More Press It Will Get

    Gracey ( profile ), 21 Aug, 2014 @ 02:58pm

    [quote]The likelihood that any ISP is going to agree to hijack their subscribers' browsing experience because some piddly company wants to start cashing more checks is... pretty low.[/quote]

    Particularly since ISP subscribers are likely to not pay their ISP fees because the ISP isn't providing the service they paid for. Subscribers aren't paying to have their browsers hijacked by some troll.

  • On the post: Spain's Ill-Conceived 'Google Tax' Law Likely To Cause Immense Damage To Digital Commons And Open Access

    Gracey ( profile ), 12 Aug, 2014 @ 11:54am

    Sooooo, when does Spain disappear from the internet?

  • On the post: Google Now Using HTTPS As A (Very Slight) Ranking Signal In Search To Encourage More Encryption

    Gracey ( profile ), 07 Aug, 2014 @ 03:47pm

    [quote] You could, perhaps, make an argument that a site that uses SSL is more likely to be a high quality site, but Google doesn't even appear to be making that argument. [/quote]

    Could you though? I've seen a lot of very bad websites created of entirely scraped contents that use SSL. That Google would even consider these as being able to rank even slightly higher in search results due to the use of SSL would be ludicrous.

    A bad website is a bad website, whether it uses SSL or not. That being true, then one would hope that Google is smart enough to rank a higher quality site that doesn't use SSL higher than it would rank a bad site that does use SSL.

    If their algorithm doesn't do that, then using SSL as even a very minor ranking factor would be a very bad step in my opinion. It needs to be and and/if situation as opposed to "oh, they use SSL so they get a better rank".

    I'd assume there is more to it than that, but assumptions often get one in a place they don't want to be.

  • On the post: Photographer Still Insisting He Holds Copyright On Photo By A Monkey, Hints At Possibly Suing Wikimedia

    Gracey ( profile ), 06 Aug, 2014 @ 11:46am

    [quote]“That trip cost me about £2,000 for that monkey shot. Not to mention the £5,000 of equipment I carried, the insurance, the computer stuff I used to process the images. Photography is an expensive profession that’s being encroached upon. They’re taking our livelihoods away,” he said.[/quote]

    Well ... perhaps he should have considered that before he gave his equipment to the monkey.

  • On the post: Max Mosley Continues His Quixotic And Misguided Quest: Sues Google For Still Finding Photos He Doesn't Like

    Gracey ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2014 @ 01:18pm

    So, um ... when does he sue Bing or Yahoo? I found as many pics relating to the er, Nazi party on those searches as I did on Google.

    Sometimes people just suck at using their brain. Oh wait ... which brain?

  • On the post: Federal Judge Gives Government Open-Ended Access To All Content In A Suspect's Gmail Account

    Gracey ( profile ), 21 Jul, 2014 @ 03:31pm

    Another good reason not to leave your emails stored in online storage vaults.

  • On the post: Techdirt Sued For $10 Million In A Frivolous Lawsuit For Posting An Earlier Frivolous Lawsuit

    Gracey ( profile ), 14 Jul, 2014 @ 11:46am

    ...too bad he lives in NY, otherwise he could just file for the right to be forgotten.

    On the other hand ... maybe we should just forget him anyways.

  • On the post: DailyDirt: Personal Mobility Solutions That Solve Non-Problems Look Cool

    Gracey ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2014 @ 06:11pm

    eh ... I think the Ryno looks dorky (as dorky as the segway); the Uni-cub sort of looks like a giant baby scale. Not cool either (but perhaps useful).

    Best of the three is bike.

  • On the post: Keurig Begins Demonstrating Its Coffee DRM System; As Expected, It Has Nothing To Do With 'Safety'

    Gracey ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2014 @ 10:47am

    Re: Re: Market, Market, Market...

    We pay about $36 for a box of 80 at Costco. Works out to .45 cents or so a cup. Not starbucks (hate their coffee), but usually Folgers.

    I don't find that particularly expensive. McGregor's was selling boxes of coffee cups that fit in Keurig in a 4-pack. Cost $1 for 4 = .25 ea. Last time I bought McGregor's it was a 12 pack for $5

    You pay for the convenience when you need a coffee asap, but I refuse to buy at the cost Keurig wants for the size K-cup. Whatever is on sale at a good price, unless the coffee really sucks (found some brands that are just baaad).

  • On the post: Keurig Begins Demonstrating Its Coffee DRM System; As Expected, It Has Nothing To Do With 'Safety'

    Gracey ( profile ), 09 Jul, 2014 @ 10:28am

    Re: Here's a suggest for Green Mountain

    It'd be nice if someone made another coffee brewer that takes the k-cups. There is already an entire market out there of people who will eventually need a new one, and won't buy Keurig's DRM model (I won't - I'll never buy another Keurig brand pot, or recommend them the way I was doing).

    What for? To make my friends and family mad at me? pffft. No thanks.

    First manufacturer that produces a pot that works with all the Keurig accessories gets my business.

    But what seems to have expired was the patent on the K-cups which isn't that big of a deal.

    There have been a multitude of mfg. making permanent filter type baskets that fit in Keurig. Melita makes one that comes in a 2-pack (got that), some off brand makes another that comes in a 2-pack (got that), and yesterday at Walmart, I saw different mfg. that has a 4-pack. Probably get that too. You can re-use k-cups (have been able to for some time) and purchase lids for them. They all work (cause I use them).

    I just fill them up with my own coffee, and store them in plastic zipper bags.

    Life is good.

  • On the post: Texas A&M Plays Hardball With A Double Amputee Over 12th Man Trademark

    Gracey ( profile ), 08 Jul, 2014 @ 06:44pm

    Re:

    What copyright?

    Trademark and copyright are not the same thing.

    ... doncha just hate it when someone doesn't read the article before commenting?

  • On the post: Would You Compromise Your Computer For One Cent An Hour? New Study Says Many Are Happy To Do Exactly That

    Gracey ( profile ), 26 Jun, 2014 @ 07:08am

    [And when participants were offered $1 per hour, that figure rose to 43%.]

    Nope, not even for $1 an hour.

    Maybe, (just maybe) if they offered more like $10/hr, I'd set up my old desktop with nothing but the OS on it and set it up there, making sure my other computers blocked all access to that one.

    Cause, well ... why not? Nothing on the computer but a bare OS and no personal information. Hook up my old wired router to our old (still active internet service) and let them have their fun while I pocket a little free change.

    But not for any amount of money would I install something like that on any current system I'm using.

  • On the post: Dangerous Ruling: EU Says Google Must Help People Disappear Stuff They Don't Like From The Internet

    Gracey ( profile ), 13 May, 2014 @ 11:24am

    Re: Of course

    Really? Howe exactly do they get control over their data?

    Far as I can tell, they have no more control now, than they had before.

    Because, as you can read ... the sites that hold the content in question are still allowed to publish it, which means it is still available to public.

    ... and you aren't given any control over whether someone else publishes information that is publicly available.

    Google isn't the public, and they don't control the entire internet, nor control any websites or what the website owners do on those websites. Including whether they publish public information or not.

    No more privacy now, than before.

    All the ruling does is make it more difficult to find that information.

  • On the post: Toronto Asked To Ban Dangerous Dr. Seuss Book For Promoting Violence

    Gracey ( profile ), 02 May, 2014 @ 06:50am

    At least the Library has some sanity. Of the 7 requests to remove various books, all were rejected. They kept all 7 of the books/films.

    This list with their reasons is here (pdf).

    http://www.torontopubliclibrary.ca/content/about-the-library/pdfs/board/meetings/2014/apr28/15_1.pdf

  • On the post: Ex-Wife Allegedly Using Copyright To Take Down Husband's Suicide Note

    Gracey ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2014 @ 02:55pm

    Re:

    It wouldn't likely be the "legal guardian" who would make the decisions, but the executor of his will. At least if his children are minors.

    Given the situation, I'd hope the executor isn't his ex, but someone neutral.

  • On the post: Ex-Wife Allegedly Using Copyright To Take Down Husband's Suicide Note

    Gracey ( profile ), 25 Apr, 2014 @ 02:53pm

    Re: Re: Re: Sad as it is...

    Really?

    I feel exactly the opposite. I would be terrified to commit suicide. Living is easier.

    Even when you don't have a perfect life (and I don't).

Next >>