Idobek 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (112) comment rss

  • On the post: Hugh Grant: Investigative Reporter

    Idobek ( profile ), 18 Apr, 2011 @ 07:43am

    Journalists found at News of the World

    Rupert Murdoch immediately issues shoot on site order.

  • On the post: FBI Hijacks Botnet, With Court Order… Then Issues Kill Signal To Millions Of Computers

    Idobek ( profile ), 14 Apr, 2011 @ 08:12am

    But.. but... cyber-warfare

    Note to the FBI, the DOD, and others demanding more powers to combat cyber-terrorism and cyber-warfare:

    a) The ability of foreign powers to shut down power plants and, other computer based infrastructure, over the internet is not real - and, therefore, this cause of action is safe but your demands for more power are based on lies.

    OR

    b) Whoops - you accidentally disabled the control system of a nuclear power plant because it was infected with a botnet.

  • On the post: UK Paper Insists Google Is Out To Destroy British Culture

    Idobek ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2011 @ 11:41am

    Google was also the enemy of The Times

    The Times "won" that war by putting up a paywall. My guess is that this is part of an editorial campaign to convince their readers that the Mail Online is worth paying for.

  • On the post: UK Paper Insists Google Is Out To Destroy British Culture

    Idobek ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2011 @ 11:34am

    Re: Re:

    All it needs to be a complete Daily Mail article is a reference to Diana ...

    Wrong paper; you want the Daily Express for your Daily Diana Updates.

  • On the post: If AT&T Puts A Meter On Your Broadband, But That Meter Is Grossly Inaccurate, Is That Meter Really There?

    Idobek ( profile ), 28 Mar, 2011 @ 07:47am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Need for government oversight

    Markets do not have a natural tendency toward monopolies. In a truly free market the very possibility of a monopoly being created creates an incentive to break it.

  • On the post: If This Is 'Piracy' Then I Support Piracy

    Idobek ( profile ), 25 Mar, 2011 @ 05:40am

    Re: Re: Re: You don't want to be considered a piracy supporter? Condemn some sites.

    Oh, for a world where this had only occurred with copyright.

    The conflating of natural rights and unnatural, granted, rights is at the root of the erosion of those natural rights. See the Canadian Human Rights Commission vs. Mark Steyn (or the right not to be offended vs. freedom of speech).

  • On the post: Irish Gov't Trying To Sneak Through Massive Copyright Law Changes Via Questionable Legal Process

    Idobek ( profile ), 01 Mar, 2011 @ 05:00am

    Re: By order of the EC?

    Oops, sorry.

    With the news that MEPs are beginning to look at copyright law more closely, I am beginning to wonder if the bureaucrats at the EC have decided to try a different tack. By getting each member state pass a 3 strikes independently the EC can then go to the MEPs with a "harmonisation" plan.

    It is a new approach to EU rule number 1: If someone is blocking a move towards more EU integration and control - route around them.

  • On the post: Irish Gov't Trying To Sneak Through Massive Copyright Law Changes Via Questionable Legal Process

    Idobek ( profile ), 01 Mar, 2011 @ 04:52am

    By order of the EC?

  • On the post: The Return Of COICA; Because Censorship Is Cool Again

    Idobek ( profile ), 24 Feb, 2011 @ 07:08am

    Re:

    Lefties? Seriously? If you're supporting COICA you're supporting more authoritarian state control for the benefit of corporations. That should scare the shit out of a proper righty.

  • On the post: Would Shakespeare Have Survived Today's Copyright Laws?

    Idobek ( profile ), 24 Feb, 2011 @ 05:53am

    Re: Not the best example

    Chaucer?

    You would have to hope that Chaucer would have been in the public domain by Shakespeare's time.

  • On the post: While Texas Politicians Claim $600 Million 'Lost' In Uncollected Online Sales Tax… It Means $600 Million Texans Saved

    Idobek ( profile ), 24 Feb, 2011 @ 05:07am

    Re: Re:

    Under your plan, Amazon/New Egg/etc could just set up a small "shipping office" in Delaware and charge the local sales tax from there -- which is nothing.

    Yes, it's is known as tax competition.

    According to the story, that's how much the State of Texas is getting paid already. If this is the problem, I don't think you've solved it.

    The problem is that the tax code is so complicated that the is a dispute over what is owed by whom.

    Texas doesn't get the $600M it thinks it's owed, and Delaware doesn't really gain anything either, except for whatever small, indirect boost there might be from having that single, skeleton-staffed shipping office operate in the state.

    Lots of the indirect boosts off lots of shipping offices. Texans get to pay less tax and (shock-horror) spend that money on what they think is important. Delaware gets a lot of shipping offices, lots of tuckers travelling through, more use out of its airfields etc etc. Focusing only on a shipping office is short sighted - those indirect benefits soon add up.

  • On the post: UK Gov't Admits That Protecting Big Record Labels More Important Than Getting Poor Online

    Idobek ( profile ), 23 Feb, 2011 @ 02:46am

    Re: No Free Market Capitalism but Oligarchy

    Being a week late I think I can safely invoke Godwin's Law.

    The "natural" progression of this subversion of the capitalism is it's rejection at the ballot box leading to National Socialism.

  • On the post: UK Gov't Admits That Protecting Big Record Labels More Important Than Getting Poor Online

    Idobek ( profile ), 23 Feb, 2011 @ 02:40am

    Re:

    You might want to look up the difference between free market capitalism and corporatism.

    So should David Cameron and Nick Clegg. Clegg is on the right side of this one, however, not understanding that a free market means NOT cosying up to big business hampers his classical liberal credentials. Just has the same misunderstanding hampers Cameron's conservative credentials.

    They would be absolutely aligned on this one but for a basic misunderstanding of economics.

  • On the post: Falsely Putting Your Wife On The Terrorist Watch List May Hinder Your Chances For Promotion

    Idobek ( profile ), 21 Feb, 2011 @ 05:04am

    Re:

    I don't know the answers to the questions you posed but I do know that if the guy was tortured then any information gained in that torture shouldn't be admissible in a court of law.

    Can we stop the bomb and send the perpetrators to prison?

    Probably not, and that is why "to govern is to choose".

  • On the post: And Now Europe Feels The Need To Catch Up To China And The US In The Self-Destructive Patent Race

    Idobek ( profile ), 06 Feb, 2011 @ 03:59am

    Convenient Excuse

    The EU doesn't need a reason a to "streamline" (i.e. gain control of) anything - they jumped on these handy headlines to accelerate plans they already had.

  • On the post: UK Intelligence Agencies Ask Court To Say They're Immune From Having To Provide Evidence

    Idobek ( profile ), 25 Jan, 2011 @ 09:22am

    Re: Re: The Answer Is Simple...

    The question becomes: do we want to prosecute them or do we want to stop them?

    Another question that always occurs to me is: had they committed a crime before the event?

    And if so: should it really have been a crime?

    There is a grey area here and that is the one that the intelligence services operate in.

    If MI5's purpose is not to gather intelligence and prevent attacks against Britain, but to gather evidence and prevent crime, how is that different from the role of the Police?

    This is, and should, be a very difficult area for the executive and the legislature to navigate.

    I would hope that they come down on the side of liberty.

    Would I say the same if there was another Brighton Bomb? I don't know.

  • On the post: UK Intelligence Agencies Ask Court To Say They're Immune From Having To Provide Evidence

    Idobek ( profile ), 25 Jan, 2011 @ 05:27am

    The difference between MI5/6 and the Police

    I have some sympathy for MI5/6 in these cases. For their entire existence their mandate has been to gather intelligence in order to stop attacks against Britain. Until recently there hasn't been the automatic requirement that the intelligence gathered would be used in a court of law (or, indeed, for any other purpose) and, therefore, have to meet due process criteria.

    That's not to say there shouldn't be such a requirement be but it does mean a change of mandate that should be debated in Parliament.

  • On the post: UK Politician Threatens To Sue Football Team For Infringement If It Moves, But Keeps Its Name

    Idobek ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2011 @ 06:50am

    Re:

    Yeah, no-one refers to them as "Spurs" at all.

  • On the post: UK Politician Threatens To Sue Football Team For Infringement If It Moves, But Keeps Its Name

    Idobek ( profile ), 20 Jan, 2011 @ 06:24am

    Grandstanding

    David Lammy is the MP for Tottenham and he is grandstanding. He has calculated, that if is makes a big enough fuss, he is in a win-win situation. Either Spurs drop the Tottenham name - he wins, or Spurs stay in Tottenham - he wins.

    It is probably a moot point as West Ham will win the bid.

    However, I can't imagine that Tottenham's residents and local council are that happy with David Lammy MP. Spurs are one of the few clubs in Britain which can rebrand very easily and they've been looking for a site to build a new stadium for a while now. Why would Spurs stay in Tottenham now? They aren't being made to feel welcome.

    On a side note: I'm sure someone can correct me if I'm wrong, and/or if the boundaries have changed at some point, but Everton F.C. haven't been located in Everton since... they were founded (I was about to write 1892 but they used to play at Anfield).

  • On the post: Indoctrinating Children To Hate Freedom Of The Press?

    Idobek ( profile ), 18 Jan, 2011 @ 09:38am

    Re: Why are Americans so interested in politics

    Perhaps if you cared more you wouldn't have been quite so shafted by the EU.

Next >>