Gwiz's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
This week’s favorites post comes courtesy of Gwiz.
I have to admit that when I first said I would give the Favorite Posts a shot, I didn’t realize how hard it would be to pick a few favorites from so many interesting articles. I happened to luck into a shorter week due to the holiday and I thought it might be easier, but not so much. Anyway, without further preamble, here are my picks for the week:
As an average working stiff with no vested interest in the industries usually discussed on Techdirt, my interests tend to lean towards the articles that deal with the slow erosion of things I hold dearly, like privacy, due process and protection against unreasonable search and seizures. The story about Austrian police seizing computers used as a Tor exit node was especially interesting to me. I found the initial discussion concerning anonymity on the internet to be very enlightening. This article also spawned an interesting phenomena in the comment section when one of the commenters voiced an extremely distasteful view of pedophilia. The subsequent reaction of the Techdirt community to this commenter became a very good argument in itself as to why the internet really is not a wild west that needs to be regulated and can do a fine job of policing itself.
Along the same lines, we had a few articles concerning PROTECT IP and the technological implications of this bill, which actually made me go and read the white paper written by some of the most knowledgeable people in regards to the DNS system. And, as an added bonus, we got to see a video of Mike discussing this issue. We also had the RIAA more or less attacking the public domain and telling us that it really has no value. At least, to offset that to some degree, we had the Polish Prime Minister realizing that things funded with public monies should be in the public domain. We need more thinking in that direction.
Making an account on any website is something I rarely do, but I felt compelled to register a profile on Techdirt for one main reason, the generally high level intelligence and mostly civil debates that happen in the comments section here. I have learned quite a bit from reading both sides of the debates and have on occasion had to revise my initial stance on issues because of it. The article about the arrest of people dancing at the Washington Memorial was one such post. When I last looked there were over 350 comments and the debate over civil disobedience and the reactions by law enforcement. Unfortunately, since I needed to keep abreast of all of the Techdirt articles this week, I haven’t finished reading though them all, but what I did read was fascinating.
On a brighter note, it’s good to see a body such as the UN acknowledging that the three strike laws and ACTA pose civil rights problems.
And lastly, on the humorous side of things, I found it very funny to see two fully grown companies acting like children on the playground and the Malaysian man who was required to apologize 100 times on Twitter for defaming someone, kind of like a modern day equivalent of writing “I will not say bad things about Susie” on the chalkboard.
Well, that’s it for my Favorites this week. I hope you enjoyed them and it’s back to lurking in the comment section for me.
Dang it, just got sucked into a rabbit hole named SomethingAboutChickens for the last hour when I should have been working.
I don't disagree with what you said in that comment, but it's really not analogous to the discussion we are having about Twitter. A closer analogy would be that you and Matt are having an argument at someone's else's house and they get to set the rules, not you or Matt.
I have to agree with Matt on this one when it comes to free speech. Unless there is a clear and credible threat, all speech is free speech whether you agree with it or not. As the quote goes: "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it". Do I personally think antisemitic speech is ok? Of course not. Do I want antisemitic speech on my social media feeds? No. Do I think Twitter should do everything they can to limit such speech? Absolutely.
I can only assume you are also very liberal therefore he looks more moderate to you. You have no clue as to who I am. I'm the proverbial "swing vote". I identify with neither the left nor the right. My votes have been cast in support of issues I deem important. And to be honest, I tended to lean conservative most of my life, especially in the 80's and 90's when I worked for a Fortune 500 energy company. I will say this though, never in my life have I voted a straight ticket for either party. That is until Jan.6 happened. I've voted straight ticket for the Democrats twice now and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future.
You are such a far left liberal It has always cracked me up when one side of the political aisle claims Mike is being biased about this or that. I've been reading this site for a decade and have seem Mike call out stupid shit from BOTH sides consistently. Does it seem that the right has been subjected to this more so lately? Probably does. But it's not Mike's fault that the right has been doing the majority of the stupid shit these days, is it?
Wait....what was this guy's name again? I might have missed it in article.
What I find even more funny is that Jeff Bezos might end up in control of The Apprentice outtakes. I'm not real sure about all the legalese in the contracts, but imagining Trump shitting his pants because Bezos might release outtakes of him shitting his pants is kind of fun.
Re: Masnick, what are you on about now??
Re:
Which parts are those, exactly? Have you actually read 47 U.S. Code § 230?
Um, no. That is not correct. Section 230 came about because we had conflicting rulings where one provider (Compuserve) was considered a newsstand and another (Prodigy) was considered a newspaper publisher with the only difference being that Prodigy moderated their users' content. So basically, if you moderated your users' content, you could be held liable for that content. Congress passed 230 because they wanted to encourage providers and platforms to moderate the content without fear of being held responsible for someone else's speech. Without 230, platforms would not be moderating their user's content or most likely, nobody would host user-generated content at all.
Taking personal responsibility for your own actions isn't asking too much either. If you choose to piss someone off on 4Chan while using your real life credentials, that is pretty much on you, my friend.
Re: Re:
The real question is: If Trump says something in the woods and nobody is around, is it still considered lying?
Just reading the link address in that sentence made me laugh.
Re: Schooling
Re:
What's next? Is he going to sue the entire internet and all computer manufacturers because Telegram is available as a desktop version?
Hey Vanna, can I buy a clue for this guy? If he dosen't want to see what is on Telegraph, DON'T OPEN THE FUCKING APP! This isn't rocket surgery.
Re: Re: Re: Let go of my Knee, Jerk
Re: Let me get this straight
Re: Re: