Josh - To common a name. This is me. 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (45) comment rss

  • On the post: Time For IT Guys To Unshackle Corporate Computers

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 27 Aug, 2009 @ 10:04am

    Re: Waaa Waaa Waaa Blaaa Blaaa Blaaa

    LOL. Wow. It sounds like someones jock strap is wound a bit tight today. Do us a favor, go to the bathroom, take of the jock strap, go back to your desk, and calm down. After that, please rethink what you wrote.

    I'm guessing that the IT shop where you work is full of men, or women, that are all what you consider nerds? Right? Or is there a vast pool of employees that work there? I've worked with IT guys that are bodybuilders, musicians, carpenters, mechanics, navy chiefs, marines, shit, they come from all all walks of life and have all types of hobbies. I would love for you to use your attitude with the one Network admin I knew that was a recently retired Navy Chief. I would love it. Or the Gunny that is 250lbs of pure muscle and stands 6'3". Would love to see it.

  • On the post: Doctor Who Uploaded Rorschach Images Now Being Investigated

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 26 Aug, 2009 @ 07:46am

    Re: Re: Hoodoo Voodoo

    Yeah.

    And they never resorted to nefarious means of trying to cure people.

    *cough* *cough* electric shock "therapy" *cough* *cough*

  • On the post: UK Gov't Now Supporting 3 Strikes: Lobbyists Win Again

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 26 Aug, 2009 @ 07:43am

    Re: WOW!

    He RD,

    Usually I agree with your Troll spotting, but I think you missed with this one.

    It looked to me like this was a total blast at the idea of creating a "suitable punishment" for it [file sharing].

    The second part of his post is what made me feel that way. It seemed that he was saying that we should be glad that the RIAA (and their like) haven't pushed for this to be crimilized yet. But as another commenter said, bring it on. Then they have to have proof beyond a shadow of a doubt. Can you imagine them having that proof? Ever?

  • On the post: Fewer Foreigners Coming To US Grad Schools: This Is A Problem

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 25 Aug, 2009 @ 09:52am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Great idea. Just one problem.

    I have a bad feeling that there are actually more good looking female engineers/scientist types then there are male ones.

    Of course I'm the exception. At least that's what my wife tells me.

    ....cue the flaming. :P

  • On the post: Swedish Court Get The Pirate Bay Taken Down

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 25 Aug, 2009 @ 08:50am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: So how is TPB's impending shut down a victory?

    Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha....breath.....hahahahahahahaha

    Oh wow. Let me get this straight. After about a dozen or so posts of you telling us how illegal it is to share any file, you encourage everyone to go download a movie? Please. Get real. I mean, at least tell us to download Linux or something useful like Open Office. But wait, that would defeat your purpose, wouldn't it? Wow.

    I do have a question for you though. You say that all P2P should be illegal and should not be allowed. What do you propose to do about the game companies that push updates to their clients, people that pay for a game and a service (WoW, EQ2, Steam/Valve games etc.) by using P2P software? Do you have a better idea about how they should do this? Should they go back to the old days of having their servers crash when they patch games or when a new game is released? Please help me understand this a bit better. Since you are such a great and awesome god of understanding how P2P works.

  • On the post: Outed Blogger Plans To Sue Google; Skank Model Mess Gets Messier

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 24 Aug, 2009 @ 10:58am

    anon. blogger

    I saw in a, either NY Times or CNN, article this morning that the blogger was actually a former friend of the model. So doesn't that mean that she may have had some insight that the rest of us didn't as to whether or not the model was a skank or not?

  • On the post: Illinois Says Sex Offenders Can't Use Social Networks

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2009 @ 09:08am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Oh I see. So you subscribe to the Fahrenheit 451 type of government.

    No one is allowed to think for themselves and only the great and wonderful government knows what is right for me and mine.

    How could I have been so wrong. I humbly submit to your greater wisdom and beseech your forgivness.

    /sarcasm

    Now give me $100 million so I can raise my children the way you see fit.

  • On the post: Illinois Says Sex Offenders Can't Use Social Networks

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 14 Aug, 2009 @ 08:42am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Um. I'm guessing you don't understand the phrase "generation older." By definition all parents are a generation older than their offspring AND they are probably not going to be "hip" on the latest and greatest social networking site/place/location/item etc. that their children will be involved in. And I call bullshit on the fact that todays parents don't know about social networking. Most of todays parents, with teenage children, are in their mid 30's to early 40's. This means that they grew up with early chat rooms, AOL, Yahoo, MSN, and do undestand social networking.

    Even their parents understand social networking. Only they didn't do it online. They did it at school dances, malt shops, drive in movie theaters, etc. And they had just as many problems there as my generation (mid 30's) did in the early chat days and as their grandchildren (my children) will have in social networking websites.

    So to say that they [parents] don't know what is going on is a blatent lie. Most parents choose to not look at what is going in. As Mike said, if I choose to not educate my children on who they should not talk to, regardless of the situation (web or real life) then I have no one to blame but myself. How dare I rely on the government or schools to teach them something so important? Most of the teachers and politicians are older than I am. So they, according to you, know even less about social networking than I do.

    Stupidity at its highest.

  • On the post: This Is America… Why Are We Banning Books?

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 05 Aug, 2009 @ 04:44pm

    Re: SCHINDLER'S LIST/SPONGEBOB SQUAREPANTS mashup!

    That sounds like a cool movie. Let me know when you produce it. I'll watch it. :P

  • On the post: Perhaps Brain Surgeons Do Use Wikipedia…

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2009 @ 02:25pm

    Re: Re: Wikipedia accuracay

    Yes but only English Majors worry about just little things as grammer and spelling. Those of us in the real world are more concerned about the overall value of the information. And if there are tiny spelling/grammer errors, so what. That's not that big of a deal. We deal with real world people all day long that may not have the best spelling or grammer but that know a whole hell of a lot more than we do in a given technical area.

    For example, I would not trust my brother to write his own resume becuase he struggles with writing the english language. But if I need some work done on high power electrical equipment, or some power poles climbed and hardware replaced, well then I'm calling him. And by the way, they have to have a working knowledge of high level math to intimatly understand what is going to happen if the cross A with C. And not just that it may be something bad.

  • On the post: Biologic Drugs Likely To Get Separate 12-Year Monopoly Protection Beyond Patents

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2009 @ 08:31am

    Re:

    Actually it's not that "sweet". My Grandmother is on Medicare and they are in a worse place perscription wise than people on different types of insurance. They keep taking money away from the plan and raising the cost that the seniors have to pay. For people on a fixed income, retirment payments or othewise, this is very bad news. This means that they now have to spend more of their money on medicine and docter visits than the month before. Meaning they have even less money to spend on things like food, transportation, and neccessities.

    So yes, those over the age of 65, and those that help care for them, do care.

  • On the post: Reasons Why Copyright On Art And Music Could Be Deemed Unconstitutional

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 03 Aug, 2009 @ 11:28am

    Re: Re:

    Dark,

    I love the way your write in your comments. If this happens I will be one of the first to check it out. I would even be willing to pay a modest sum ($5-$15 depending on the size of the book) for such a book, based on how you write your comments. Keep the comments coming.

    I read TechDirt first for the insights of the community (i.e. the writers) and disagree with some of what is said, but agree with more of it. I read it second to find your comments and get a bit of a laugh for my day. Most of the time it is perfectly placed in my day and brings much needed relief.

    Thanks again. And I hope Mike takes you up on this offer.

  • On the post: Apple Says No To Google Voice On The iPhone

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 28 Jul, 2009 @ 08:42am

    Re: Misunderstanding about Google Voice

    Actually this is a misunderstanding...on your part.

    GV only makes use of my mobile minutes if I have it set to call my cell phone. However, I can set it to call any number I want it to. For example, I have it set to call my work number between 7:30am and 4:30pm weekdays and my cell phone any other time. So it would only use my cell minutes if it called my cell. However, it does not use my cell minutes for long distance or international calls. It is only a local call to my cell phone no matter what number I dial.

    The way it works is that you purchase international minutes directly from GV. With rates substantially lower than the rates that POTS or even cell providers offer.

    So what the second commenter (tony) said, that some people had trouble understanding, makes sense. If you have a cell plan that allows for free incoming calls, i.e. it does not charge against your cell plan minutes. Then GV truly does not cost you anything. GV calles your phone via your GV number, so that call is free to you, then GV completes the call to the person you are trying to reach using the POTS. Again, not using any of your cell minutes.

    So really, the only way that GV can impact the price you have to pay AT&T, or any provider, is if you have it set to allow SMS messages to be sent to your phone. And that's only if you don't have a $20 unlimited text plan.

  • On the post: Is It A Crime To Watch The Naked Erin Andrews Video? No, But It Makes You A Total Jerk

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 23 Jul, 2009 @ 01:27pm

    Re: The sad part

    OMG DH. I was nodding along agreeing with you. Then I read your last line.

    I so needed that laugh. I just spent the last 2 1/2 hours in a boring ass tele-con. Thank you.

    And of course I know you live for comments like this. :)

  • On the post: Trent Reznor Explains What A Musician Needs To Do To Be Successful These Days

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 13 Jul, 2009 @ 10:33am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: who are the music consumers?

    I'm interested in knowing why you say that those of us in the 30-40 age range bracket are "not...AFRAID of technology...[but]unfamiliar with it."

    I seem to remember growing up with all of this technology, learning how it works and making it work for me. I seem to remember somthing about Bill Gates and Steve Jobs not being that much older than me (I'm 31, almost 32) and creating (or stealing, but making popular) all of the technology you see around you today.

    In my humble opinion, you would not have the level of technology you have today if the 30-40 year olds of today had been afraid or, hell, even unfamiliar with, technology.

  • On the post: Taiwan Regulators Tell Dell It Must Sell Mispriced Monitors At $15

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2009 @ 09:15am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Wow. I would hate to live in your house. Your kids must hate birthdays and christmas.

    You: "How much did you spend on this gift for me?"

    Kids: "About..."

    You: "Don't give me any of this about crap! I want exact figures!"

    Kids: "But daddy, we bought so much stuff that day. And we didn't keep our reciept." (crying)

    You: "Well that will teach you. Go return all the gifts, re-buy them, and tell me the exact price you payed!"

    yeah. All kinds of fun at your house.

  • On the post: Taiwan Regulators Tell Dell It Must Sell Mispriced Monitors At $15

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 02 Jul, 2009 @ 07:58am

    Wow....

    I have to add my two cents here.

    I spent close to ten years working in the grocery industry in California. Near the end of my time with them, the grocery chain I worked for had almost bi-weekly, unscheduled visits from weights and measures. Now this wasn't because my particular store was doing anything wrong, but that there were three or four stores that had been nailed for improper pricing and sales.

    Basically what this means is that even if an employee screwed up making signage or placing tags, the price that that was in front of the item better match what it scanned at the register. If it didn't, and it didn't matter if it was low or high, the store and the chain were fined. And it was a fine in the hundreds of thousands of dollars.

    It got to the point that we were so paranoid that we were triple checking everything in the store, not just the department we worked in. If anything was wrong, we had to be prepared to honor it at that price. If that meant that a $80 bottle of scotch was sold for $20, then so be it.

    All due to regulations by the state, and possibly federal government, department called Weights and Measures. This applies to any store that sells anything. Not just to items that have to be weighed first. If the item once scanned does not match the price that the sign says, the store is in violation of regulations.

    Here's an experiment to try. Go to your local Wal-Mart and find a display of an item that has a price that looks too good to be true. Using your trusty Cell Phone camera, start recording video. You might want to make sure that you have a phone with a memory card in it and set your video to full size recording. Record the display, maybe your watch (with date and time), the price on the display, and leave your camera running. Go get in line and make your purchase. Now the fun part. If the item scans at a higher price, tell the cashier and watch the fun. They will send a manager to check on the display. The manager will come back and tell you that you were wrong, of course, and that the display sign matches the price scanned. Now, go back to the display with the manager and you will see that yes, it does match. But, just 5 minutes ago, it didn't. Now you get to pull out your cell phone, still recording of course, and show the manager the video. Then see what happens. You will probably get kicked out of the store for videotaping without permission and they will not sell you the item.

    This may seem like an extreme condition, but it's happened to me at least twice, and to other people I know several times. The only way to get them to honor that price is to force them to with the proof.

    Now when it comes to a website deal, screenshots rule. Don't let them try to fake you out like that.

  • On the post: Football Player Threatens To Sue Impostor On Twitter

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 01 Jul, 2009 @ 09:02am

    Re: Good luck!

    Actually it IS against the law to creat false user accounts that break a sites TOS. Just ask Lori Drew.

  • On the post: Consumer Group Wants ACTA Discussions Stopped Until Consumer Rights Are Represented In Negotiations

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 30 Jun, 2009 @ 07:59am

    Re: Slippery Slope

    please tell me that this commentor just forgot to add his /sarcasm tag.

  • On the post: Connecticut Town Tells ASCAP, BMI, SESAC To Get Lost Over Royalty Bills

    Josh - To common a name. This is me. ( profile ), 25 Jun, 2009 @ 12:09pm

    Re: HA!

    Actually this was the funniest thing in that article:

    "BMI and ASCAP represent about 97 percent of all U.S. songwriters and composers who write music for today's recording artists. SESAC represents the rest."

    According to this reporter 100% of the songwriters and composers who write music belong to one of these associations. That is such a blatent lie it's funny. For example one of my co-workers, an IT professional by trade, is a musician/songwriter in his off time. One of his greatest accomplishments was getting a song, he wrote, into a movie. He was so proud of the fact that when we were discussing the music industry the other day he made sure to tell me that when his song is listed in the credits...There is no ASCAP or BMI next to his name.

    The best part of this...Even though he doesn't have one of those associations to "get his fair share" for him...The contract he was able to do himself, alows him to still recieve residuals from that song. Now it's not a lot, but it's still something.

    It's just amazing how much these associations will blatently lie to get their point across.

Next >>