Scenario: 1. Man annoys his neighbor, who has serious anger management issues. 2. Angry neighbor hacks into his new car because manufacturer failed to proactively upgrade known security flaw. 3. Man begins to back out of his driveway but hits the brakes when he sees a school bus on the street. 4. Brakes do not function due to the angry neighbors' hack and he T-bones the bus. 5. Children are injured, some seriously. 6. Bus driver says he saw the brake lights come on but the car did not slow down. 7. Investigation discovers the hack and the perpetrator. 8. Parent sue angry neighbor, who has few assets, and the manufacturer. Lawyers find during discovery that manufacturer was aware of the problem but decided not to fix it. 9. County Attorney tries to determine if criminal charges could apply to the case and if so who to charge.
Call him a 'cabildero'. That is the Spanish word for lobbyist. More words of Spanish origin are becoming commonly used every day. No reason not to contribute. Besides, if we start using it some people will actually look it up and as a result actually think about what was said.
There are other words that come to mind, but my mother would not have approved of me using them. We could just use 'varmint'. She would not mind that one and it does imply the proper level of disdain.
All these content-ID schemes sound great. But like many solutions, especially when using software, they don't create a complete solution. They work to shutdown the bad, sometimes, and take a lot of the good with it.
When they do take down the wrong things there Must be a way to disagree and override the take down. The current YouTube system is not adequate. The should also be a way for the operators to lock out repeat offenders, including an appeal process if they disagree.
Any system that has an automated take down should have shield setting. This would prevent content that has been determined to be 'acceptable' from being taken down automatically. This would cover fair use or repeated bogus take downs on content that someone finds disagreeable.
This is not a problem that will be quickly solved, if ever. What I don't understand is why Google has not made improvements in YouTube. They must not be making any money off the thing and have a tight budget.
A terrorist is someone whose actions are intended to undermine the stability of society. This can be done with indiscriminate bombings or by subverting the public's confidence in elected leaders. Cameron falls in the second category.
Any invasion of privacy must have 'a compelling government interest'. There must be a reason other than 'because we can'.
Hitler must be laughing in his grave, wherever it is, to see what Britain has become.
@coward I wish there was a timeout device on this blog. One that would limit comments after the first three. 1/2 hour delay on #4, one hour on #5, and so on. Allow Mike to override the delay if there was actually a reasonable discussion.
There is a silver lining to this cloud. If juries start awarding the maximum against corporate violators instead of high school students and housewives we may be able to get the maximum reduced to something more reasonable for first time offenders. I hope.
The cell phone user grabs a minute or two of the film and sends it to a friend with the comment 'great movie, get over here' or 'it stinks, don't bother'. In either case it is 'fair use' included as part of a review, published by sending it to the friend with comments.
And who specifically asked for them to grab all that data on Domestic calls? Who told them it was OK to lie to congress? I really hope somebody catches Alexander dirty on a totally unauthorized operation. He needs to be made an example of. Mr President, are you still in charge around here?
Anybody in government, business, or private life should know that there are things you don't talk about in public.
My wife was riding the train to work one day and sat near two people talking about how they were going to con another department into taking on a project that they had messed up far beyond recovery. Three hours later she walked into a meeting where they were to plan the procedures for transferring the project to her department. She said the look on their faces when she was introduced as a senior manager was priceless. They did not take the project.
Hayden knows the rules. I guess a case of legendary arrogance is what is required to lead this countries intelligence agencies. That and the assumption that you never have to pay for your sins.
You have to look at all this from the perspective of so many Texas legislators. They do not understand how things work. Especially not computers, those nasty little boxes that contain porn and other evil things. Things like a description of a 'rape kit'.
They think that in order to win when you loose you just have to fudge the paperwork like the good old days.
Techdirt has not posted any stories submitted by lars626.