katsai 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (47) comment rss

  • On the post: Twitch Experiments With Intrusive Ads That Piss Off Its Most Important Asset, Its Talent

    katsai ( profile ), 17 Sep, 2020 @ 08:22pm

    Experiment time

    I've had great success with uBlock Origin preventing ads on YouTube. I don't spend a lot of time on Twitch, but now i'm curious to see if it will work there as well.

  • On the post: Much Of The Broadband Growth Ajit Pai Credits To Killing Net Neutrality Was Actually Due To A Clerical Error

    katsai ( profile ), 12 Mar, 2019 @ 05:22pm

    A likely excuse

    Really? You're going with "the data was 'parsed incorrectly in the upload process'"? How does that even happen? Is that even possible? Someone with more experience than me in submitting forms to the FCC please chime in.

  • On the post: Company Storing Families' Personal Data Blocks Users/Researchers Informing It Of A Security Flaw

    katsai ( profile ), 09 Aug, 2017 @ 06:44am

    Re: "some companies seem to feel they should be able to handle it however they want" -- Wait a sec! They're PRIVATE and CAN according to Poophat Ken White!

    Nowhere in the article did anyone say the company shouldn't have the right to block people on twitter. The entire thrust of the article was that blocking folks who are trying to help you by pointing out security flaws is stupid. You've missed the whole point of the article. This may help you make sense of it:

    TL;DR
    Companies are ignoring or blocking security researchers who tell them about vulnerabilities. They are perfectly free to do so, but it's a stupid move on the part of the companies that do.

    Hope that helps.

  • On the post: Sheriff Defends Deputies' Lies In Court By Saying Officers Didn't Know They Were Supposed To Tell The Truth

    katsai ( profile ), 21 Jun, 2017 @ 03:35pm

    To paraphrase Dave Chappelle...

    To the judge: "Sorry your honor. We didn't know we couldn't do that."

    To the deputies: "Pretty good, right? Because we *did* know we couldn't do that!"

    Once again proving that ignorance is absolutely a defense against the law, assuming you are a law enforcement officer.

  • On the post: AT&T's Already Making Things Up To Get Its Massive New Merger Approved

    katsai ( profile ), 31 Oct, 2016 @ 10:02am

    The Spin is Already In

    "This is just AT&T getting warmed up. Over the next few months, media outlets will be hammered with op-eds from lawyers, lobbyists, politicians, policy wonks, "consultants" and think tankers (all with undisclosed financial ties to AT&T) happily claiming that this new merger will cure cancer, protect toddlers, and keep the nation's puppies warm and happy."


    This is already happening. Last week, NPR had a segment where they interviewed one of the guys from Mashable, talking about how awesome this will all be for consumers and how great it will be and how zero rating will help people. The interviewer was a little skeptical, but for the most part let this mouthpiece ramble on unchallenged. And who is one of the key investors in Mashable? You guessed it. Time Warner. That little tidbit was not disclosed in the interview. Color me surprised.

  • On the post: Another Court Finds FBI's NIT Warrants To Be Invalid, But Credits Agents' 'Good Faith' To Deny Suppression

    katsai ( profile ), 24 May, 2016 @ 04:42pm

    The "Good Faith" exception should go away

    If a warrant is invalid or improperly obtained, all evidence uncovered by that warrant should be inadmissable. That the officers were acting in good faith is meaningless. IF I'm driving down the highway at 65 MPH and believe the speed limit is 65, when it is actually 55, my action that I'm taking in good faith does not shield me from a ticket. Ignorance is no excuse from the law. Unless you're law enforcement I guess.

  • On the post: Remember How US Marshals Seized All Those 'Hoverboards' At CES In A Patent Dispute? The Company Has Now Dropped The Case

    katsai ( profile ), 17 Feb, 2016 @ 04:01pm

    Junior partner: "Are we sure we want to file this? They probably aren't infringing. What if they fight it?"

    Senior partner: "If that happens, we'll address it with a Future Motion...

    (puts on sunglasses)

    to dismiss."