Khym Chanur 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (694)

• On the post: Don't Regulate The Internet Like Every Company Is The Same

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 19 Apr, 2019 @ 08:12pm

  Re:

  Are you the one who keeps going on about accounts with large time gaps in their comment history being astroturfing/shills? If so, two questions: 1) Why wouldn't astroturfers just create new accounts? I don't think there's enough people who decide if a commenter is an astroturfer based an account's age to make it worth acquiring old accounts. 2) How do you claim these accounts being acquired? Techdirt simply selling abandoned accounts?

• On the post: John Oliver Has Famous Actors Act Out The Deposition Richard Sackler Is Trying To Hide

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 17 Apr, 2019 @ 04:08pm

  Re:

  Works fine for me; must have been a glitch.

• On the post: Take-Two Dismisses Its Lawsuit Against Pinkerton Agency As The Latter Runs From Its Own Cease And Desist

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 17 Apr, 2019 @ 12:41am

  Re: Re:

  This doesn't really sound like the real John Smith.

• On the post: Take-Two Dismisses Its Lawsuit Against Pinkerton Agency As The Latter Runs From Its Own Cease And Desist

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 16 Apr, 2019 @ 11:59pm

  Re:

  I don't see any such comments on the original article.

• On the post: Legacy Music Industry Shouldn't Get To Watch Over The Royalties Of Independent Songwriters

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 16 Apr, 2019 @ 12:15pm

  Re:

  Is your conclusion from using your logic skills merely that there's a big problem the legal profession, or do you have any more specific conclusions?

• On the post: Starz Issues Laughably Unbelievable Excuse And Apology For Taking Down Tweets

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 12:32pm

  Re:

  a certain internet mafia

  It'd be really great if you'd stop being coy and actually name names.

• On the post: Starz Issues Laughably Unbelievable Excuse And Apology For Taking Down Tweets

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 12:31pm

  To play Devil's Advocate...

  and certainly wouldn't require them to be indiscriminate.

  Perhaps they not only have a contractual obligation to mitigate unauthorized distribution, but the time limit imposed by the contract is so ridiculous that the only way to meet that limit is to use a bot to immediately issue a takedown notice for anything that could possibly be unauthorized distribution.

• On the post: Stupid Battle Over YouTube Subcribers Now Includes A Takedown Order From A Court In India

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 10:50am

  Re: Re: Re:

  or the reviews about certain lawyers that are going up....

  Please post links to them once those reviews go up. I'll be looking forward to the entertainment.

• On the post: Stupid Battle Over YouTube Subcribers Now Includes A Takedown Order From A Court In India

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 08:56am

  Re:

  How, exactly, does piracy "reward" people like PewDiePie?

• On the post: ICE's Fake University Sting Operation Also Used A Bunch Of Fake Facebook Profiles

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 15 Apr, 2019 @ 11:09am

  Remember, ICE didn't just list the university on the website as being approved.

  At the request of DHS, a national accreditation agency listed the University of Farmington as being accredited in order to help deceive prospective students.

  The university was also placed by federal investigators on the website of ICE as an university approved by them under a government program for foreign students known as SEVIS (Student and Exchange Visitor Program)

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 13 Apr, 2019 @ 12:48pm

  Re: Re:

  Also, the Bartnicki v. Vopper Supreme Court decision says that it's not illegal to report on information that was gathered or generated illegally.

• On the post: Nancy Pelosi Joins Ted Cruz And Louis Gohmert In Attacking CDA 230

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 11:48am

  Re: MM says Section 230 is to promote "free speech" by The Publi

  When you keep a site private and comments FIRST go through editorial control, only THEN do you have editorial control. If you accept the Section 230 protections and have immunity, then you must NOT exercise editorial control

  Also, what about non-profits, which are a form of corporation. If a Christian non-profit runs an online forum, do they have to let Satanists and atheists comment? If a scientific literacy non-profit runs a forum, do they have to let flat-Earthers comment?

• On the post: Nancy Pelosi Joins Ted Cruz And Louis Gohmert In Attacking CDA 230

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 11:34am

  Re: MM says Section 230 is to promote "free speech" by The Publi

  When you keep a site private and comments FIRST go through editorial control, only THEN do you have editorial control. If you accept the Section 230 protections and have immunity, then you must NOT exercise editorial control

  So how does that apply to sites like Reddit, where you have subreddits which are moderated by people other than Reddit, or Blogger.com, where the site hosts various blogs, and the blog owners (who aren't Blogger.com) moderate each blog? Can the individual mods/bloggers remove content as they see fit, since they aren't the corporation, or do they have to allow all comments since they're being hosted by corporations?

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 11:25am

  Re: Re:

  From the Wikipedia article on the Pentagon Papers:

  [Ellsberg] was indicted by a grand jury in Los Angeles on charges of stealing and holding secret documents. Federal District Judge William Matthew Byrne, Jr. declared a mistrial and dismissed all charges against Ellsberg and Russo on May 11, 1973,

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:44am

  Re: Re:

  My understanding of the New York Times Co. v. United States Supreme Court decision regarding the Pentagon Papers is that the receipt and distribution of stolen data isn't illegal if the data is stolen from the government.

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 09:43am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Too early to tell

  Academics demand that the encryption algorithm be public; and implementation of the algorithm can be closed source. And the reason why academics want the algorithms to be public is that it's very easy to make bad encryption algorithms, so ideally an algorithm should be vetted by as many people as possible to minimize the chance that there's anything wrong with it. Academics also see no point in keeping encryption algorithms secret, since security through obscurity won't work: the government has enough resources to reverse engineer any secret encryption algorithm used, so keeping the algorithms secret doesn't do any good.

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 08:01am

  Re: Re:

  IANAL, but my understanding is that if the reporter knew that the source had committed a crime in obtaining the information, but the reporter had in no way encouraged the commission of the crime, then the reporter publishing it is not a crime, as if it were a crime to publish it that would be prior restraint. In New York Times Co. v. United States (June 30, 1971) the Supreme Court held that the New York Time was allowed to publish information about the Pentagon Paper even though Daniel Ellsberg had not yet been cleared of acting criminally in sharing the Pentagon Papers with the press (which happened in May 11, 1973).

• On the post: There Are Many Reasons To Be Concerned About The Impact On Press Freedoms In The Assange Indictment

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 07:09am

  Re: Re:

  I think you responded to the wrong comment.

• On the post: Julian Assange Arrested On Behalf Of The US, For Trying To Help Manning Crack CIA Password

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 12 Apr, 2019 @ 05:10am

  Re: UUUhhhh

  The charge is conspiracy to get unauthorized access to a computer system. For example, if a group of people plan to rob a bank they can be charged with conspiracy to rob a bank even if they haven't robbed the bank yet.

• On the post: Julian Assange Arrested On Behalf Of The US, For Trying To Help Manning Crack CIA Password

  

  Khym Chanur ( profile ), 11 Apr, 2019 @ 08:56am

  Re: Re: About the use of Linux

  Of course there was physical access, and much of the restrictions are to prevent unauthorised persons accessing it at all if the room is unattended, not bad deeds by one of the rooms operators.

  If the computer is being left alone with someone who isn't trusted with administrative access, they can set a BIOS password and put a lock on the computer's chassis. Such a setup would only be a hassle when someone had to mess with the computer's innards.

Next >>