Keroberos 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (557) comment rss

  • On the post: University Of Washington's Defense Of Twitter Limits On Journalists More Ridiculous Than The Restrictions Themselves

    Keroberos ( profile ), 15 Nov, 2012 @ 12:34pm

    Re:

    What is it with people and any sports? Why does anyone give a crap when people throw around a ball?

  • On the post: For All The Talk From Hollywood About Making Sure People Get Paid, Why Doesn't It Pay Interns?

    Keroberos ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 09:35am

    Re: trix are for kids

    Fail. They would have to file for non-profit status. Just because a company doesn't make a profit doesn't make it a non-profit.

  • On the post: For All The Talk From Hollywood About Making Sure People Get Paid, Why Doesn't It Pay Interns?

    Keroberos ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 09:30am

    Re: Re:

    He/she's a troll. And the first lesson in troll school is to never, ever, read--because if you read, you will learn, and you can't be an effective troll if you learn anything.

  • On the post: Making The Most Of File Sharing: Free Market Research & A Captive Target Audience

    Keroberos ( profile ), 25 Oct, 2012 @ 09:17am

    Re:

    Butt pirates? Hee hee hee...

  • On the post: EFF Files Motion To Have Court Release Seizure Warrant In Megaupload Case

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 09:39am

    Re: Re:

    Remember, their incomes aren't as important as those of corporate executives.

    FTFY, they couldn't give a s**t about the employees.

  • On the post: EFF Files Motion To Have Court Release Seizure Warrant In Megaupload Case

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 09:36am

    Re: Re: Where's the list of people hurt by Megaupload

    That's exactly the point. To be a good trolling shill you must at all costs avoid learning anything (so reading is out).

  • On the post: EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 09:21am

    Re: Re: Mike too is holding "Blind & Deaf Access Rights" as cloak

    Yeah. I place disciples of Ayn Rand somewhere below the others that also take works of fiction way too seriously (at least they're just harmless kooks). Ayn Rand's disciples think they know something about economics and can be dangerous to the rest of society and should separated from it.

  • On the post: EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 08:45am

    Re: "anyone who uses an exception" -- Those will multiply!

    Either you didn't read the proposed changes--or you're just outright spreading FUD.

    None of the more troubling proposed changes have anything to do about limiting access to just the disabled--or defining disability. They're about giving some undefined, nebulous "someone" to much power over the exception process.

    And it is just outright FUD claiming that "Mike and his grifter and pirate pals" are wanting this treaty just so they can pirate--anyone that wants to pirate something already is.

    Are people abusing disability laws? Sure they are. How big of a percentage are? Pretty low. What percentage are doing it over something as trivial as getting a parking space? Microscopic. What percentage would abuse this treaty? Most likely microscopic, I doubt most people would consider a book or a movie reformatted for the use of the blind and deaf to be a substitute for the original (I don't know about you, but I can't read braille, and a movie with extra audio for the blind would be too annoying).

    Plus, how did this become an argument about piracy? There's nothing in this treaty that says anything created for the disabled has to be free--it just says it has to be made by an "authorized entity", described here:

    [Authorized entity means an entity that is authorized or recognized by the government to provide education, instructional training, adaptive reading or information access to beneficiary persons on a non-profit basis. It also includes a government institution or non-profit organization that provides the same services to beneficiary persons as one of its primary activities or institutional obligations.]

    [establishes and follows] [may maintain] its own rules and procedures
    i) to establish that the persons it serves are beneficiary persons;
    ii) to limit to beneficiary persons and/or authorized entities its distribution and making available of accessible format copies;
    iii) to discourage the reproduction, distribution and making available of unauthorized copies [including by informing authorized entities and beneficiary persons that any abuse will lead to stopping the supply of accessible format copies]; and
    iv) to maintain reasonable care in, and records of, its handling of copies of works, while respecting the privacy of beneficiary persons in accordance with Article H; in the case of an authorized entity that serves a rural or small population and does not distribute accessible format copies in electronic form for whom record keeping would constitute an undue burden such record keeping may be appropriately adjusted.
    [v) An authorized entity carrying out cross-border exchanges of accessible format copies establishes and follows rules and procedures which enable the provision of anonymous and aggregated data relating to such exchanges for the evaluation, when appropriate, of their volume and periodicity.] [This provision shall not apply to developing and least developed countries, nor to governmental authorized entities, libraries or educational institutions.]]

    In the case of an authorized entity that engages only in activities under Article[s] [C] [C and E], [as regards physical copies] items iii to v? iv to v? shall be discretionary.
    Nothing about anyone getting anything for free there, plus all kinds of things about not redistributing works obtained under this treaty.

    And here's the part defining "disability":
    ARTICLE B
    BENEFICIARY PERSONS

    A beneficiary person is a person who

    (a) is blind

    (b) has a visual impairment or a perceptual or reading disability which cannot be improved to give visual function substantially equivalent to that of a person who has no such impairment or disability and so is unable to read printed works to substantially the same degree as a person without an impairment or disability; or

    (c) is otherwise unable, through physical disability, to hold or manipulate a book or to focus or move the eyes to the extent that would be normally acceptable for reading,

    regardless of any other disabilities.
    Not much grounds for abuse there. Except for fraud, which is already illegal.

    Exceptions are necessary. You use them every day (without them you could get sued for defamation for just about every post you make). So, they're only good when they benefit you, but not when they benefit someone else?

    The self-contradictions some people can maintain just amaze me. Did you have to take class to be able to do that? Or were you just born that way?

  • On the post: EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 07:46am

    Re: Mike too is holding "Blind & Deaf Access Rights" as cloak

    How amusing. You do know that argument can go both ways, right?

    Those who consume culture (even if it's mere entertainment) can't be held hostage to the "needs" of the few (content producers), no matter their plight. That path leads quickly to endless "entitled" demands.

    And I just love when people can't see how self contradicting Ayn Rand's Objectivism is, "Don't regulate business--except when those regulations (copyright and patents) are beneficial to business". Which of course goes against the stated purpose of copyrights and patents; to promote progress--not to promote the profits of businesses.

    In regards to your final point. Talk about an "emotional ploy"--"Just think about all those filthy pirates who'll use this loophole to steal content". Hmm...do you really think the pirates are waiting around for this treaty to pass so they can pirate stuff?. If you do, you're not as bright as you think you are. That ship sailed off long ago--and has circumnavigated the earth multiple times (if it can be pirated--and someone wants it--it probably already has been pirated).

    So...in all, a pretty piss poor effort--0 internets for you.

  • On the post: EU & US Negotiators Looking To Hold Blind & Deaf Access Rights Hostage To Get A New ACTA/SOPA

    Keroberos ( profile ), 23 Oct, 2012 @ 07:06am

    Re:

    Doesn't look like anything specific, just wording that's open to interpretation, and when applied a specific way could against what the treaty is supposed to be about.

    For example:

    [A Member State/Contracting Party may confine limitations or exceptions under this Article to published works which, in the particular accessible format, cannot be obtained commercially under reasonable terms, including at prices that take account of the needs and incomes of beneficiary persons in that market.]
    Who gets to define those "reasonable terms"? Some government agency, or the publisher (and is there a difference between the two)?
    [Provided that prior to the making available or distribution the originating authorized entity did not know or have reasonable grounds to know that the accessible format copy would be used for other than beneficiary persons.]
    How can anyone know this? The wording is very weaselly, you can claim that anyone that distributes any work electronically has "reasonable grounds to know that the accessible format copy would be used for other than beneficiary persons", this is the nature of the internet--if it's digital, it's being pirated somewhere.
    [Contracting Parties/Member States, in their national [law/legislation], shall/should provide [additional/any] limitations or exceptions [in conformity with/as per Article Bbis of] this treaty/instrument [only] in certain special cases which do not conflict with a normal exploitation of the work and do not unreasonably prejudice the legitimate interests of the right holder.]
    Again, who gets to define this?

    Haven't had a chance to dig too deep into this, but on the surface it looks like their trying to add things which would discourage people from providing accessible works out of fear of falling afoul of some obscure provision (or shutting them down using those provisions)--which is what they tried to do with SOPAACTA.

  • On the post: Hollywood Accounting: How A $19 Million Movie Makes $150 Million… And Still Isn't Profitable

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 03:23pm

    Re: Box Office Revenues

    No one is questioning the amounts spent, we want to see the invoices so we can see what exactly it's being spent on, and if thats what the going rate for those services are.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 10:37am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: I think I get it

    No, primary school IT has always been low paying/lowest bidder. Schools just weren't heavy tech users until now--so no need. So they don't understand that quality IT for the level they're at now costs money--Hell, some Fortune 500 companies don't get that.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 10:29am

    Re: She is a teacher?

    Teachers have at least the same ratio of technological idiots as the rest of the general population--and it could be higher, day to day use of computers happened relatively late in the educational system than in other job sectors, so they could have had less exposure.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 10:21am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bit early

    True, but you can limit the amount of stupidity that can be accomplished. Which goes back to my previous point. If you can't limit the stupidity in it's use, don't allow it's use.

    I, for one can't think of any legitimate use for an iPad in an educational setting that couldn't be accomplished some other less expensive way. It's a toy. We should be using our time and money actually teaching our kids something useful, not giving them shiny toys to play with and calling it education.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 10:05am

    Re: Re: I think I get it

    Yes, when you connect an iDevice to your personal iTunes account it asks if you want to sync, but how many people really understand what that means? How many people actually read the notification popups--or do they just click OK? And since I don't use iCloud, I don't know if it asks to sync, or if it just does it. Seeing as it's Apple, it probably just does it--user friendliness and all that.

    My question is, why does a school have a device for use by the students that allows you to put whatever the hell you want on it? If you can't lock that ability out, they have no business using them in an educational setting. If they can be locked they need to get some IT people that know what the hell they are doing. In any case the school was extremely negligent in using these devices in an educational setting.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 09:44am

    Re: I think I get it

    Well, if I was a student and had a school issued iPad, I would assume that any photos/documents were for educational purposes.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 09:40am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Bit early

    Yes, because kids--and even many adults, are such great rule followers.

    The best rule in IT is, if you can't limit the device/software to conform to your requirements/policies, don't allow its use. It saves you from a lot of headaches.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 09:22am

    Re: Re: Re: Bit early

    Yeah, She synced a school iPad to her personal iTunes account which pulls all of your data over. So there's multiple levels of school district failure here: Why can a school issued device even sync to an iTunes account? Can't they lock syncing? If they can't, why is it being used in the schools by our children?

    Great, the kids can put their games/music/movies on it--how educational. Another fine example of a school board wasting money on something because it's "new and shiny" without having a clue how to use it in an educational setting.

  • On the post: School Suspends Students For Finding 'Racy' Photo Teacher Accidentally Put On Their iPads

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 09:06am

    Re: The reaf WTF

    Because some salesperson convinced some idiot on the school board that iPads are great learning tools. Apple--and other tech companies have been doing this for years. In the 80s my grade school bought a bunch of Apple IIes that were only ever used to play games (ooo Oregon Trail, so educational--or not), the rest of the time they sat and gathered dust--no one on the staff there had any idea how to use them--let alone how to teach anyone anything useful with them.

    Plus the idiotic belief that throwing these new tech devices at our kids will somehow magically fix the education system--which is funny because my grade school kids, who have minimal (less than an hour a week) time on computers or tech gadgets at home, consistently get high marks in school.

  • On the post: Free Software Foundation Certifies 3D Printer — And Why That Matters

    Keroberos ( profile ), 19 Oct, 2012 @ 08:33am

    Re: Incentives for R&D?

    Since we're going all sci-fi...if we ever get to a point in time where 3D printers can make something as complex as a smart phone, I highly doubt monetary incentives will be as important as they are today . This is in the realm of Star Trek replicators, so just about everything could be made for the cost of the raw materials and electricity used to make it, so the only truly finite things would be electricity and raw materials, and by then we may have solved those--infinite energy through fusion or high efficiency solar/wind/geothermal/water power and energy to matter conversion.

Next >>