grumpy's Techdirt Profile


About grumpy

grumpy's Comments comment rss

  • Jun 08, 2012 @ 01:11am


    Troll sued Giggle because they have big money. But I thoroughly concur with your conclusion, although I find it a bit on the mild side.

  • Jun 08, 2012 @ 01:10am

    Re: Re: infrngment!

    "...on threat of Orbital Anvil Insertion" should cover it nicely. I'm sure (D)ARPA has looked into something like that at some point. If they haven't, they should. It's sorely needed.

  • Jun 08, 2012 @ 01:06am


    Yeah, my first thought was "Prior art!" too. But when has that ever stopped anyone from patent trolling...

  • May 18, 2012 @ 02:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    And this is exactly why I don't understand this issue popping up again and again. Do the law makers not see the massive potential for Denial of Service attacks in this kind of legislation? Anonymous etc. can have a field day bombarding inboxes everywhere with accusations and fake cease-and-desist letters. The cleanup costs will be tremendous. But maybe that's exactly what the lawyers are banking on...

  • Apr 07, 2012 @ 08:09am


    Either privatize the war like this:

    Or let gubmint handle it. Why do you think electronic media are copied when taken across the border of the US...?

  • Apr 07, 2012 @ 08:03am

    "Not only do you have to be willing to fail, you have to be willing for people to ridicule you and call you names."

    They laughed at Da Vinci. They also laughed at the village idiot. Nathan Myhrvold, you might not be what you think you are.

  • Mar 11, 2012 @ 07:57am

    You just scared me...

    "The gatekeepers won't be successful in this effort until they can control software distribution all over the world and outlaw computers which can be modified by the user"

    Ever heard of UEFI? Microsoft is already implementing it in the Real World(TM) and it's really going to take choice away from computer "owners". Besides already being in force, it's a bit like SOPA.

  • Mar 09, 2012 @ 08:14am


    This sounds very much like a newspaper I read. It costs about ?5 for a week, comes once a week and is filled to the brim with one- or multi-page well-informed articles on a lot of subjects. I only read about half of it, the rest is about subjects I don't care too deeply about, but it's value for money regardless. I'd have no problem at all shelling out $1/week for high-quality text. I'd even pay for more than one article, if they were good.

  • Mar 09, 2012 @ 08:02am


    > If they wanted to pay me every month to follow me around

    Oh, but they are. They let you use their servers and developers. Neither well-behaved electrons nor coffee come free so they have to recoup their losses in some way.

    What that argument says about using NoScript/Adblock/etc is not pleasant to contemplate. Me, a thief? Nah, can't be. ;-)

  • Mar 09, 2012 @ 07:55am


    "Comedian Rick Mercer says he started the petition, because he wanted to show that any idiot could trigger a referendum."

    And any idiot did. :-)

    But seriously, this is different. It's not for a national vote but to inject ideas into the parliamentary process. Parliament can squash anything in seconds if it doesn't like it - the initiative is about free speech, not free "y'all must take me seriously". OTOH, squashing something reasonable could be hard to explain come election day so I actually find the Finnish initiative quite interesting.

  • Mar 08, 2012 @ 04:50am

    Data protection?

    A serious question: could face recognition and *very* personalized ads run afoul of data protection acts here, there and everywhere? I have a suspicion that here in .dk all it would take to be exempted was a single letter to the Ministry of the Interior and noone could legally ID me (as in "Oh, this is grumpy, serve up some Snow White") in public to serve ads, but we have pretty strict protections in place. How will the Union react?

  • Mar 02, 2012 @ 01:31am

    Re: Re:

    I will personally be happy to pay USD 7 to *not* be forced to use Facebook. Some services do not give that choice. Spotify, I'm looking at you.

  • Dec 22, 2011 @ 11:21am

    Is this fragile?

    Is it just me or are the parties pushing for *PA really painting a big fat "DoS me" target on themselves? I mean, giving Anonymous etc. a legal weapon for taking a lot of stuff offline without even having to fire up nmap seems a bit foolhardy for corporate fat cats to even contemplate. I can't for a second believe that any mechanism set up to handle censorship is not going to be snowed under seconds after publishing their mail address. What am I missing?

    Also, making it expensive to defend against seizures cuts both ways, which does not seem like a smart move for a business already bleeding money according to themselves. The only group I can see benefitting from this are members of the ABA. Anyone for a game of conspiracy theory...? :-)

  • Dec 22, 2011 @ 11:08am

    Re: Re:

    Bugger. Missed. Should've been placed one comment higher. My timing is peccable today...

  • Dec 22, 2011 @ 11:06am


    A heartfelt "yippee-ki-yay, motherfscker" would actually be extremely on-topic.

  • Dec 02, 2011 @ 07:19am

    Re: Yes! People want to support artists

    I think "own the music" can be translated to "I want to be able to hear it again no matter what some nincompoop does to the website that hosts it or the key that unlocks the DRM". Videos disappear because of invalid DMCA takedowns, DRM'ed material can be inaccessible if the key service shuts down or someone decides that you really shouldn't have the item you paid for (Amazon and 1984), little things like that. I very much prefer to own stuff, electronic or otherwise. I may be too old for this new world... ;-)

  • Dec 02, 2011 @ 07:12am

    Re: Re:

    The guy making money by trusting his customers. Yes, it's sick but what can we do?

  • Nov 08, 2011 @ 01:48am


    So instead of needing the gut feelings of a few experienced cops a police department can now let everyone have the gut feeling love. I don't see how narrowing your list of prime suspects is going to have any impact on anyones rights.

    Data quality is a valid point, however as it has other implications too this project shouldn't be blamed for it.

  • Nov 04, 2011 @ 04:01am

    Say again...?

    "Hopefully this small bit of opposition helps those on the other side think twice about the unintended consequences of a massive new tax regime for small businesses online."

    You want politicians to consider the unintended consequences of legislation? I think the temperature in Hell must drop quite a bit before that happens...

    What is more likely to happen is that pols in the states where internet businesses nest will cry fowl and start defending their constituents' interests. If they wake up in time, that is. Otherwise there'll be a stampede to offshore and more US jobs will be lost.

    Then again, your country seems bound and determined to stay a 20th century mastodon so I'm not gonna bet on anything smart happening. Oh, and remember what happened to the mastodons...?

  • Oct 11, 2011 @ 04:55am

    No worries

    > this pretty much destroys any argument the US makes around the globe in trying to protest political censorship

    As everybody has been ignoring the US in this area for a long time already there's no loss of face involved. About the only thing the US is respected for these days is their military power.

More comments from grumpy >>