Laroquod 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (156)

• On the post: Samsung Routed In Apple Patent Fight; Told To Pay $1.05 Billion

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 26 Aug, 2012 @ 12:25am

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Update...

  Cryptic insult rhetoric is totally not useful to any other readers. For the record, a finding that patents have not been infringed is not the same as a finding that the patents are valid, which as I understand it has yet to be determined.

• On the post: A 'Too Polished' Kickstarter Video Is No Substitute For Connecting With Fans

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 24 Aug, 2012 @ 05:36am

  "If people like you and your work they'll pay" but people don't like those who come across as overly polished or slick -- surely you have perceived that from the modern world. It is the direct result of the constant assault on our senses form overly polished, slick, advertising. If you wish to avoid this knee-jerk reaction, it would behoove you to use production values as far differentiated from commercia television as possible.
  
  AND connect with fans. The world is more complicated than one thing being at play and being the answer to everything. Don't ever listen to anyone who tells you otherwise.

• On the post: Fifteen Years Ago Today, Techdirt Was Born

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 24 Aug, 2012 @ 05:31am

  Happy belated, Techdirt! If you did not already exist so perfectly, it would be necessary for somebody to invent you.

• On the post: Ubisoft Realizing That Perhaps 'Pirate' Users Are Really Just Like 'Free To Play' Users Who Don't Pay

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 23 Aug, 2012 @ 07:45am

  So when will Ubisoft finally make the obvious conclusion from the parity of free-to-play and piracy rates, that their state-of-the-art DRM has not stopped and will not ever stop a single person from playing their games for free?
  
  They believe they are stopping 'casual pirates' but every casual pirate (or even casual non-pirate) knows a hardcore pirate with a crack for everything. They have not stopped a single soul. Game, set, and match.

• On the post: Just As Ecuador Grants Asylum To Assange, It Prepares To Extradite Blogger For Exposing Corruption

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 20 Aug, 2012 @ 03:08pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  The sarcasm made no sense to you because you made a false assumption about the point the comment was trying to make.

• On the post: Seven Reasons Why Google Is Making A Mistake In Filtering Searches Based On DMCA Notices

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 18 Aug, 2012 @ 06:13pm

  Poor argumentation

  Reasons 1, 2, and 3 are redundant: they are all just variations on the slippery slope argument, which is a pretty poor argument (just go to the intended place on the so-called 'slope' and stand there, don't move -- problem solved), so it wasn't particularly wise to repeat three times right off the top. The other points are better but the first three: weak. Kitchen sinking is not the best debating strategy, since your opponent will always focus (probably exclusively) on the one thing you say that is least persuasive.

• On the post: Why Tragedies Result In Overreactions: 'Our Brains Aren't Very Good At Risk Analysis'

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 04 Aug, 2012 @ 07:30am

  Re: Good God, Man. Punctuate!

  You put the comma in the wrong place. It should go after 'everyone' not 'easy' -- which would more properly separate 'from the general public to earnest politicians' from the rest of the sentence as a clause modifying 'everyone'.

• On the post: NYTimes Columnist Explains How He Torrented 'The Bourne Identity' Because It Wasn't Available… Then Sent A Check

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 03 Aug, 2012 @ 05:33pm

  Re: Re: Weird

  Not all the colonies. We spell it 'cheque' in Canada, too.

• On the post: Hollywood Made Him Do It: Two More Theories On The Aurora Shooter

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2012 @ 05:10pm

  Re: Re: Star Trek? Doubt it

  Link seen. Achievement unlocked. Thank you.

• On the post: Hollywood Made Him Do It: Two More Theories On The Aurora Shooter

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 31 Jul, 2012 @ 04:35pm

  Star Trek? Doubt it

  I'm gonna have to call B.S. on the suggestion that someone in the media seriously attempted to link this shooting to Star Trek, unless I see a link.

• On the post: Press Speculates Batman Shooter Must Have Played Video Games; They're Right: He Loved Guitar Hero

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 30 Jul, 2012 @ 02:51pm

  Star Trek?

  Who has attempted to link the shooting to Star Trek? Please help me I need to know.

• On the post: Amazon Hides Classic Free Public Domain Ebooks

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 28 Jul, 2012 @ 03:46am

  Re:

  "ebooks...are going to end up being the bane of writers and will lead to the decline of serious literature."
  
  Gutenberg's enemies just called from the 15th Century. They want their silly argument back immediately -- the printing press must be destroyed, who's with 'em!

• On the post: Gov't Says They Requested 24,270 Wiretaps In Total; Sprint Alone Says They Received Over 50k Requests

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 11 Jul, 2012 @ 01:42am

  See the thing is, politicians actually lie

  In other words, either Sprint's definition of "wiretaps" is different than everyone else's, its number is wrong... or... someone's been lying to Congress.

  
  
  ... or... Congress has been lying to someone. Why overlook the obvious?

• On the post: Nina Paley Explains Intellectual Disobedience

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 28 Jun, 2012 @ 03:23am

  Re: Re:

  Except for the part about making art without an audience being self-indulgent -- that's just daft.

• On the post: A Postgame On Canada's Copyright Reform

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 27 Jun, 2012 @ 05:24am

  Re: Re: Re:

  "But if we don't acknowledge that they have gotten certain things right, at least in principle, then what reason do they have to listen to us in the future?"
  
  Same reason they pretended to listen to us in the first place. Because we vote them in and pay their salaries. They aren't children and they don't need (nor do they respond to) pats on the back to do well. They will only respond to continued pressure until they realise that their attempts to fool us and have it both ways will never fly.

• On the post: Pirate Bay Block Initiates Streisand Cascade, Drives Record Traffic

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 03 May, 2012 @ 08:11pm

  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Streisand_effect

• On the post: Google Sued Because Some People Wonder If Jon Hamm Is Jewish

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 02 May, 2012 @ 08:30am

  Re: Re:

  What, you never heard of 'Ms.'? They even named a whole magazine after it, what was that about?

• On the post: Google Sued Because Some People Wonder If Jon Hamm Is Jewish

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 02 May, 2012 @ 08:27am

  Re: Re: Re: Correction

  According to my religion, my religion isn't a religion. So you cannot criticise my religion for being a religion. Got that?
  
  Also, according this post, this post isn't a post. Therefore, you cannot reply to it. SLAM DUNK.

• On the post: Prolific DVD Bootlegger Is 92 Year-Old WWII Veteran

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 28 Apr, 2012 @ 12:07pm

  This is just another of the many data points showing that in a society where ordinary behaviour is criminalised, via selective enforcement, some citizens end up being more 'equal' than others.

• On the post: UK Police Planning To Arrest Twitter Users For Mentioning The Name Of A Rape Victim

  

  Laroquod ( profile ), 26 Apr, 2012 @ 04:53pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  "A lot of the tweets were definitely not supporting the victim. Many people who tweeted were apologists for Ched Evans."
  
  That's irrelevant. The purpose of this law is to prevent public identification of a victim -- not to punish people with a certain opinion about that victim.
  
  For this law to be taken truly seriously, you would have to punish those who unwittingly mention the victim's name while supporting her, to the exact same extent as those who mention the name in course of smearing it. Both are prejudicial to a trial, so if an anti-victim tweeter gets jail time for mentioning a name, then so should a pro-victim tweeter.
  
  If you think it's absolutely preposterous for a citizen to get jail time for mentioning a victim's name while tweeting in support of her, then you are against this law. Can't have it both ways.

Next >>