jakerome 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (214)

• On the post: Report Says Saudi Prince MBS's Whatsapp Account Personally Sent Jeff Bezos Malware Used To Access His Phone

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 22 Jan, 2020 @ 11:57am

  Trojan Horse redux

  Is this the first example since Troy of a sovereign leader using a Trojan horse to attack his enemies?

• On the post: Sony Pictures Legal Affairs VP Files Bogus DMCA Notice Because His Salary Is Listed On Wikileaks

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 11 Jul, 2016 @ 10:46am

  Wrong approach, but...

  It's the wrong approach entirely and a clear misapplication of the law. And this case, while frustrating for the lawyer, doesn't nearly rise to the level of disclosure necessary where some sort of redaction would seem warranted.
  
  But I can guarantee you, there are cases out there of Person A and Person B discussing Person's C very private information that is now being served by Wikileaks. Maybe the address of someone being stalked, discussion of a medical procedure, or other information that could be damaging if widely-- all "shared" without Person C having anything to do with it.
  
  Maybe it's a pure hypothetical. In those cases, what is the appropriate remedy? I no more want all my personal information spilled on the internet than I want the NSA to vacuum it up. Should anything be done in egregious cases?

• On the post: Rhode Island Attorney General Pushes Yet Another Terrible Cybercrime Bill

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2016 @ 01:52pm

  Re: Take that

  And that (assuming my first comment ever shows up) is two consecutive messages intended to cause intimidation.
  
  What nonsense this would be.

• On the post: Rhode Island Attorney General Pushes Yet Another Terrible Cybercrime Bill

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2016 @ 01:52pm

  Take that

  My writing style will intimidate you into silence.

• On the post: Rhode Island Attorney General Pushes Yet Another Terrible Cybercrime Bill

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 15 Mar, 2016 @ 01:51pm

  In your face Masnick!

  I will destroy the entire concept of your post with this comment.

• On the post: Final Text Of CISA Apparently Removed What Little Privacy Protections Had Been In There

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 08 Dec, 2015 @ 08:25am

  Complete Internet Surveillance Act

  What else should one expect from the Complete Internet Surveillance Act?

• On the post: Senior Former Intelligence Official Admits That 'The Point' Of CISA Is Surveillance

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 27 Oct, 2015 @ 07:59am

  Retronym

  The
  Complete Internet Surveillance Act of 2015.
  
  CISA

• On the post: While Most Of The Rest Of The Internet Industry Is Fighting Against CISA, Facebook Accused Of Secretly Lobbying For It

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 26 Oct, 2015 @ 10:39am

  A better acronym

  Actually the acronym is fine. Finally figured out what it's really short for.
  
  Codification of Internet Surveillance in America.

• On the post: Yes, I Was Deeked By Two Hoax Kim Davis Stories Today

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2015 @ 03:12pm

  Anyone can get duped

  Anyone can get duped, that happens. What baffles me is that Techdirt would publish an article giving any credence to a lawsuit (at $150k or $1.2M) for playing a song in public even with Huckabee paying a license. I was expecting this t show up on Techdirt with an explanation of why the copyright suit would get thrown out.

• On the post: Smoking Gun: MPAA Emails Reveal Plan To Run Anti-Google Smear Campaign Via Today Show And WSJ

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 25 Jul, 2015 @ 12:20am

  A pin drop

  You'll hear a pin drop at a rock concert before you see the Big Media companies broadcast this story.

• On the post: Florida Governor Signs One Bill Protecting Free Speech… And Another That Undermines It

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 22 May, 2015 @ 05:17pm

  Thankfully the state can't strip first amendment rights

  What a waste of a law. There must be hundreds of laws passed each decade which seek to undermine the first amendment in a variety of ways. Good hung that constitutional rights cannot be stripped away through legislation. Can't wait to hear the gnashing of teeth from Hollywood, California to Hollywood, Florida when google and others get this crappy law invalidated as grossly unconstitutional.

• On the post: Facebook's Plan To Be The Compuserve Of Developing Nations Faces Mounting Worldwide Criticism

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 21 May, 2015 @ 03:35pm

  Re: Re: And who is funding the rest?

  You're welcome?
  
  Here's the thing: none of us are in a position to demand Facebook do anything. If the campaign to get them to not do something is successful, it's not clear that Facebook or anyone else will pick up the baton for subsidized access. In any case, it will certainly take longer to provide that access.
  
  But for people that already have the real internet, getting Facebook to not provide a dumbed down version is a win, right? After all, the poor in developing country shouldn't be allowed the option of accepting Facebook's Internet.org offer. We know better what the developing poor want than they do.

• On the post: Facebook's Plan To Be The Compuserve Of Developing Nations Faces Mounting Worldwide Criticism

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 21 May, 2015 @ 01:52pm

  And who is funding the rest?

  "And two, if Facebook is so very concerned about the poor, it should put its money where its mouth is and shift to a subsidized model that gets Facebook out of the way and provides access to the real Internet, free from obvious interference, censorship, privacy and neutrality concerns."
  
  I imagine providing the real internet for free will cost a little more than Facebook is willing to spend. Who's going to step up & spend the rest?
  
  Maybe sites should just offer 1% for the developing world. 1% of total revenue is used to subsidize internet access. You guys should get it started!

• On the post: Legislators Introduce Bill Calling For Nationwide Ban On Non-Disparagement Clauses

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 09 May, 2015 @ 10:15am

  Re: Re:

  And this article is the third link! Will this inhumanity never cease?

• On the post: Tone Deaf Zuckerberg Declares Opposition To Zero Rated Apps An 'Extremist' Position That Hurts The Poor

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 06 May, 2015 @ 02:31pm

  Re: Re: Hard time getting worked up now

  Google Voice costs $0 because the end user has already paid for internet access.
  
  Try using Google Voice without paying for internet access.
  
  Obviously layering VOIP on top of already paid for internet access costs pretty much zero.
  
  So yes, if someone pays for internet access-- maybe Facebook, maybe the government, maybe the tooth fairy-- then VOIP is easy to add on.
  
  But you're living in a fantasy world if you think ISPs or Facebook are going to provide unlimited, uncapped internet access for free. And without that free internet access, there is no $0 Google Voice.
  
  No go ahead and take some new bit out of context and make another attempt at a cogent argument.

• On the post: Tone Deaf Zuckerberg Declares Opposition To Zero Rated Apps An 'Extremist' Position That Hurts The Poor

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 06 May, 2015 @ 02:26pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Hard time getting worked up now

  That's great. Who's paying for it?

• On the post: Tone Deaf Zuckerberg Declares Opposition To Zero Rated Apps An 'Extremist' Position That Hurts The Poor

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 05 May, 2015 @ 11:04am

  Re: Re: Hard time getting worked up now

  Item 3 costs far less than item 1, because only low bandwidth services are allowed in item 3.
  
  There's no economically sound one to enable item-- free internet for all. The only way free service can be provided is either with massive government subsidies or by instituting limits on either total data or the type of sites allowed.

• On the post: Tone Deaf Zuckerberg Declares Opposition To Zero Rated Apps An 'Extremist' Position That Hurts The Poor

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 05 May, 2015 @ 08:33am

  Hard time getting worked up now

  If the ISPs are giving away access, it seems that have a few options:
  
  1) provide uncapped data to any website, effectively providing complete Internet access for free. Not a great business plan.
  2) provide capped data to any website for free.
  3) provide uncapped data to a limited number of sites for free.
  
  Option one simply won't work from a business perspective. It comes down to 2 or 3. Either way, in no economically viable universe are the local ISPs in developing countries going to provide substantial VoIP or video streaming services for free.
  
  I'd like to know the alternative is that will provide those services without providing massive government subsidies.

• On the post: A Gronking To Remember Is Immortalized In Lawsuit Against Apple/Amazon/Author

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 29 Apr, 2015 @ 03:53pm

  Seems legit

  Fairly good case. Even if the photographer owns the copyright (probable) and licensed it for use (highly doubtful), I think there's about a nil chance that the couple signed a release broad enough to include featuring it on the cover of a book, e or otherwise.
  
  But I reckon Amazon et. al., are on pretty firm ground due to Section 230. The author? Not so much.

• On the post: Google To EU: You Know, No One Really Uses Our Vertical Search Products

  

  jakerome ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2015 @ 11:42am

  The key here is consumers benefit because Google shows results from their vertical search products, reducing the need to visit any specialized search engine, be it from Google or a competitor.
  
  A Modest Proposal would be for Google to do some A/B testing while they are still allowed to operate their own search engine. In Bucket A, Google. In Bucket B, the version of Google that the EU & its corporate backers have promoted-- no product search results, no map on the results page, no dictionary definitions, no calculators, etc.
  
  See which one harms consumers more.

Next >>