OldCurmudgeon’s Techdirt Profile


About OldCurmudgeon

OldCurmudgeon’s Comments comment rss

  • Apr 7th, 2015 @ 2:16am


    That's the bit I had to laugh at. He seems to think that because it's unprecedented it should not be allowed.

    Throw a dictionary at this guy - the word means "never done or known before" - it's like "only people who swear all the time are allowed to swear".

  • Aug 21st, 2014 @ 6:24am

    (untitled comment)

    The video demonstrates clearly how IS feels about US citizens and what they plan/hope to do to them.

    The comments here and elsewhere demonstrate clearly how US citizens feel about IS and what they plan to do about them in return.

    The acts on the video are an example of why most US citizens feel that way.

    Do you see the imbalance? Where is the debate about why IS feels this way towards the US?

    It is exactly the arrogance demonstrated by the desire to remove the video from the internet that enrages so many people around the world. It's like putting your fingers in your ears and squeezing your eyes shut because somebody hates you.

    The utterly repulsive levels of dishonesty, greed and thuggery demonstrated by the US government in their actions in their own country and in countries not their own is fuelling this fire to the point that even US citizens are revolted.

  • Jul 12th, 2013 @ 4:09pm


    WooHoo!!! Opportunity for a site called SlashDirt anyone?

  • Jul 8th, 2013 @ 12:58pm

    Your bank has a huge amount of saleable metadata about you.

    They could strip off all identifying data such as your card number and address and leave just your post/zip code, the amount you spent and where.

    This would be saleable data. Is there anything in your contract with them that says they cannot do that?

  • Jul 4th, 2013 @ 9:23am

    Re: If this were two questions.

    At least in private hands it would definitely be under the rule of law.

  • Jul 4th, 2013 @ 8:20am

    If this were two questions.

    Consider separating this issue into two simple questions.

    1. Should this data be collected?

    Even though this sounds like a horrifying step towards big brotherhood, the presence of the data in an accessible form makes a great deal of sense in law enforcement.

    2. Should the government do the collecting?

    If no (and I think that is the only answer to this question) then surely the logical conclusion is a) a private company should "buy" the data from Verizon et. al. and b) said company should "sell" (on production of a court order) the results of a search.

    This not only solves the problem but imparts financial controls over abuse.

    The fact that the data is in private hands, is not accessible in any way other than through searches accompanied by a dollar charge AND a court order should mollify most arguments.

  • Jun 11th, 2013 @ 4:10pm

    Bletchley Park

    It all started in Bletchley Park. The soon to be GCHQ and later NSA did such a good job that they have had carte-blanche ever since.

    If you really think "putting it all together" isn't the main function of the secret services you are living under a rock.

    And how will you do that without "getting it all" eh?