restless94110’s Techdirt Profile


About restless94110

restless94110’s Comments comment rss

  • Feb 7th, 2019 @ 3:51pm

    Anonymous Coward

    Can anyone tell me why Anonymous Coward represents over 50 percent of every comment field at Tech Dirt?

    Why on Earth is this troll, trolling? Who would ever read a thing he/she/it has to say, since he/she/it trolls so often that he/she/it clearly is a lunatic.

    I really don't understand. Why is Anonymous Coward not being reined in on this blog?

    Wake up, Tim, or whoever has finallly woken up to what I told you in the comments a year ago: shutting down Craigslist and Backpage is an attack on prostitution, sex traficking does not exist It's a codeword for prostitution.

    Finally you are coming around to a dim understanding. Congrats Now kick dirtbag Anonymous Coward to the curb, k?

  • Oct 18th, 2018 @ 1:02pm


    I'm really not understanding why you are going on and on about this suit.
    It's obviously without merit. It has nothing to do with whether the plaintiffs have standing.
    Trump has 1st Amendment rights. Any challenge to any citizen's 1st Amendment rights is without any merit before any US court
    This is another stupid piece of nonsense put forth by Trump Derangement Syndrome lunatics.
    Don't feed the lunatic. Your article is also without merit because it does not deal with the root Free Speech issue clearly delineated by this nonsense.
    Wake up, Tech Dirt guys.

  • Oct 17th, 2018 @ 10:28am


    Yep, just like I told you before. The Sex Trafficking hysteria is just a code word for prostitution. Keep making prostituion illegal, except now call it sex trafficking. In other words, no one would willingly have sex for money, so the only possibility is that they have been trafficked.

    This is now and has always been Puritans disguised as feminists pushing anti-prostitution laws disguised as sex trafficking.

    Only this time the penalties are multiplied 1000 times.Insanity multiplied.

  • Sep 25th, 2018 @ 11:02am

    The Problem with your Article

    The imaginary problem of political bias??? Nothing imaginary about it, bub. What you smokin' today?

  • Sep 15th, 2018 @ 11:10am

    Another View

    The author wants to attribute motives of white superiority and/or aristocracy to the practice of bands like Zep, the Rolling Stones, and the Animals of rearranging and recording songs written by old bluesmen. He also indicates some kind of cultural appropriation claim.

    But the reality then was obviously different. You may not be able to tell much from a trival conversation with Robert Plant 2 decades ago, but you can go to Keith Richard's autobiography to see what was at play here: musicians who heard something remakable in the nearly-forgotten and unpopular form of blues music.

    They were intensely excited by this new music. They didn't think of being white, they didn't think of the blues players as being black. They just admired and were enthralled by the music and how it was made.

    That some of the tracks were not properly accredited had more to do with their management and the idea of rock and roll and just wanting to have some fun.

    It's ridiculous to assess any other motives to the work of these great musicians. They stand right alongside all of the blues greats. And for those forgotten blues greats, many of them were saved from poverty by the white guys from England.

    It's ridiculous to even meantion cultural appropriation as it is a toxic and fake term: all human progress, innovation and creativity comes from one person imitating and adding to the work of other people and other cultures. Cultural appropration is a weasal term for segragation and stagnation. If it had been "enforced" in the 60s, UK musicians would have been prevented from creating iconic music that still influences us all today.

  • Aug 4th, 2018 @ 3:40pm


    It is difficult to understand how the numbskull who wrote this essay could say that shadow banning and other bullshit against so-called right-wing thought is bullshit. I guess this idiot didn't see the two black sisters, Diamond and Silk, testifiying before Congress that they have been censored.

    Only a willfully ignorant moron would not have taken note of the valid concerns of those who don't subscribe to the regressive view of the US and the world.

    Tech Dirt spits on its own legacy of such great work on copyright and other issues by hosting this utter garbage.

    Again, only a sub-moron would try to appear "even-handed" by denying what's been going on. I have first-hand experience with shadow banning on both FB and Twitter, as do many other more notable celebrities. To deny that? That's fake news.

  • Aug 3rd, 2018 @ 6:55am

    The Binney Retraction is Untrue

    Sic Semper Tyranus had the same nonsense as is written in this article, but Binney has commented as excerpted here:

    "The Misquoting Of Bill Binney

    Disobedient Media recently spoke with former NSA Technical Director Bill Binney, a co-founder of Veteran Intelligence Professionals for Sanity, who was featured in Campbell’s article.

    Binney told us that he stands by the assessment made in the VIPS memorandum to President Trump, published last year. He told us that Duncan misrepresented his statements describing Guccifer 2.0 a fabrication. While speaking with us, Binney utterly refuted Campbell’s dishonest portrayal of Binney having changed his stance on the issue.

    Binney told this author that he referred specifically to Guccifer 2.0 as a fabrication, adding that it doesn’t matter where the information was downloaded, or when, or that the information was manipulated, because the point is that it was not hacked, and the who/where does not alter that fact. He said that Guccifer 2.0 was: “Clearly a fabrication, a fake, put out there to confuse. Timing is irrelevant, fake is fake. You can manipulate timing, you can change anything, but it doesn’t matter. It makes no difference.”

    He added: “We [VIPS members] were calling it fake from the beginning, and we still do.”

    Binney told us: “We agreed it was a download, not a hack, the whole thing was a set up – we can’t prove who is responsible or where they were located, but that is irrelevant because it was still a download, not a hack, which tells us that the Guccifer 2.0 persona was a fabrication.” He added that Julian Assange and Craig Murray can prove the origin of the information, and that both have stated clearly that the Russian state was not their source.

    Binney confirmed that, though Campbell captured the essence of what he said in terms of referencing a fraud, Campbell distorted Binney’s view by framing its presentation so as to appear as if he had changed his mind on the matter.

    Binney stated that he found Duncan’s article to be ‘long and confusing,’ lacking in evidence, adding that he prefers a “Nice, clear argument, with lots of evidence” Binney explained to Disobedient Media that he also took issue with Duncan’s presentation of the Mueller indictments, and with the vicious doxxing of Adam Carter in what he called some “Some vague attempt to suggest that Carter is an agent of the Russians.”

    Binney reminded this writer that if a hack had occurred, the NSA would have been able to show not only that the intrusion took place, but who was responsible, and where the information was went. Binney stated that the lack of such evidence having been produced by the NSA, especially the inability to prove that hacked information was ever sent to WikiLeaks, may have played a role in the NSA’s lukewarm “moderate” confidence in Russian interference, in comparison with the CIA and FBI’s confidence in the matter. Binney added that in this case, the only agency whose opinion matters is the NSA’s."

    As Assange and Craig Murray have said it was a leak from an insider not an outside hack.

  • Jul 19th, 2018 @ 10:29am


    When I hear words like disinformation and fake news and their ilk, I always wonder if the people writing these articles can:

    -name even one specific piece of information diseminated in some blog that was disinformation. Just one example.
    -tell anyone with a straigh face how reading a piece with some purported flasehood in it (which, of course, describes accurately most of the articles written in the NYT, the WaPo, and spouted on CNN, MSNBC, and even Fox), could effectively prevent any individual from critical thought processes. There is a sucker born every minute, but you can't fool all the people all of the time. In other words, these articles purporting to show that some meanies somewhere could really change anything in a person's mind by saying something false, they assume that people are stupid zombies.
    -and finally, fake news is a dogwhistle for an article with a view, opinion, or even evidenc-filled content that the author or the mainstream does not agree with, and thus considers untrue. In other words, the contents of an article that has been labeled as 'fake' could just as easily be (and often is) just an article expressing a different opnion or view of things.

    It is astounding to me that TechDirt would not understand that the entire fake news thing is just an attempt to censor speech.

    But again, name even one specific bit of supposed fake disinformation disseminated by some blokes in Macedonia. And then be ready for that specific bit to be argued: What is fake about it? Is it an opinion that is "outside" the mainstream (and that is your sole criterion for calling it fake)? Then would be, how would a person reading the specific article have changed his vote in favor of Trump by reading said "disinformation?"

    I doubt that any specifics will ever be put forth for this stuff. It's all nonsense. Even if I read 1,000 articles of so-called "disinformation" it could not possibly have changed my assessment of Ms. Clinton's venality and unsuitability, which came from her own actions and her own statements.

    Neither would this so-called disinformation campaign have changed the opinions of anyone else either. It is an insult to the basic intelligence of human beings to believe that they can be so easily led. But again: led to where? Name one specific bit of disinformation and make sure it isn't just a point of view that you disagree with.

  • May 25th, 2018 @ 1:47pm

    Let me Understand...

    So let me get this straight:

    An illegal alien who happened to have escaped detection for years, decided to become a "journalist," and report on other illegal aliens. Is that right so far?

    And then ICE arrested him for being an illegal alien. Right again?

    And then someone on Tech Dirt wrote an article on the supression of the press?

    Is that correct?

    Interesting. So if I commit crimes, all I have to do is become a "journalist" to evade being arrested?

    Please help me. I'm trying so hard to understand why Americans fight so hard for lawbreaking illegals. It really is hard for me to get it.

    So, help me. If I commit say... murder? And then I become a journalist. Then ICE or the cops or anyone should have no reason at all to arrest me?

    That is exactly what you were saying in this preposterous bit of nonsense you call an article on Tech Dirt.

  • May 24th, 2018 @ 8:12pm

    Oopsie! Judge decides Social Media has to honor Free Speech

    So glad this activist judge has ruled that Free Speech must be strictly honored by all private social media companies. Now Congress does not need to act.

    Finally, Free Speech comes to social media!

  • Apr 30th, 2018 @ 11:23pm

    Sex Trafficking is Fake News

    As I have said twice previously in comments to these articles, sex trafficking is code for prostitution. There is literally .0001 percent sex trafficking done in the sex trade.

    You have finally written an article, which verifies that, but you still felt the need to virtue signal 2 or 3 times about that sex trafficking is real.

    Dude, it ain't real. It never was. Yes. The way to deal with .0001 percent sex trafficking is solid police work. But it's such a non-existant "problem" it makes it very very hard to do police work on it.

    We are in the new Puritan times with "sex trafficking" and MeToo. Only they look to be far far worse than the olden days of Puritan times. It is madness. Utter madness.

  • Mar 15th, 2018 @ 7:43am

    (untitled comment)

    Always great to see some arrogant Tech Dirt writer listening to prostitutes.Too bad the writer still thinks that sex trafficking is a thing, when it is just the re-defining of prosititution to a term that makes people think that they are "saving the children."

    So long as the writer continues to use the idiotic and dangerous term sex trafficking instead of prositution (sex worker is more accurate but really it's just prostituion, which should be legalized, and won't be when it's continually camouflaged by "sex worker" usage), then all of these law heads passing their legislations (and they will never stop until you face them off with true terms) will keep passing or trying to pass more and more of these horrible, draconian, tyrannical laws.

    You have made the mistake of using the terms assigned by your opposition. Cut it out. Call a spade a spade.

  • Mar 9th, 2018 @ 6:33am

    (untitled comment)

    The root of all the harm done by SESTA is he false labeling of prostitution as sex trafficking. That one lie underpins SESTA. Failure to deal with that root problem is why all of these ridiculous articles written here are ineffetual.

  • Mar 8th, 2018 @ 5:10pm

    SESTA will do nothing to stop anything

    Since sex trafficking is code for prostitution, SESTA will do nothing at all except bring more police state intrusion in privacy.

    You really need to get a grip on this term sex trafficking. It is meaningless. It's true meaning is prostitution. If you believe prostituion should remain prohibited then by all means continue to use the stupid term sex trafficking.

    But it would best you educate yourself and your readers.

  • Feb 22nd, 2018 @ 5:05pm

    Trafficking is Mostly Fake News

    Trafficking is the new word for prostitution. Don't fall for it! Only think is: Congress already did!

    This is nonsense at level defcon 5.

    America: we are lost.

  • Oct 2nd, 2017 @ 5:20pm

    Trafficking is Mostly Fake News

    While I applaud the articles you have been writing against SESTA, you really need to write about the elephant in the room.

    The Puritan anti-sex people behind this act have successfully characterized prostitution as sex trafficking. Regular prostitution--practiced by women and some men voluntarily--is now called sex trafficking.

    In study after study, it has been shown that the amount of acdtual sex trafficking is extremely small. You are far, far, far more likely to be trafficked into a factory job for no pay forced to work long hours your id or passport kept in escrow, than you are to be trafficked for prostition of some kind.

    But dressing up the pig of prostituion prohibition with the lipstick of "trafficking" has fueled this movement. The attack on Backpage is nothing more than an attack on prostitutes. Kamala Harris knew that or should have and continued on.

    That people do not like prostitution is clear. That it is illegal in most parts of the United States is true. Nevertheless, it goes on and it will always go on.

    Banning Backpage or limiting the entire internet so as to get to prostitution (and porn) is not the way to deal with prostitution.

    Either is calling it sex trafficking.

    Derailing this name change campaign, might also derail the SESTA campaign, because it would at least notch down to a great degree the hysterical push to pass the measure. This fact (prostitution is not trafficking) should be a key part of all articles written about this draconian measure.

  • Feb 15th, 2017 @ 1:54pm

    Pretty Damn Unclear

    We've been pretty damn clear that we think the Trump administration's targeting of people from a few countries by banning them from entering the US is both inhumane and misguided.

    You are pretty damn unclear: A 90-day temporary ban is something that has been done by President Obama and other Presidents before. It's not inhumane, it's not misguided, it's temporary.

    Your first paragraph fails to mention that it is temporary and it has been done many times before, thus giving a false impression. Is it ignorance on your part? How could it be? You've been corrected several times. That leaves prejudice and malice.

    Or simple insanity. Which is it, bud? My conclusion is malice and insanity with a heavy does of totally irrational prejudice.

    Keep on siding with the the tech companies driving down wages with phoney H1-B visa laws. It make you look more lame every single day.

  • Feb 6th, 2017 @ 1:05pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: More Cognitive Dissonance from Tech Dirt

    Another dead giveaway of the regressive left:

    Snark (though that seems to be a despicible desease of almost all Gen-X)

    and Ad hominem fallacy.

    Scanning these comments, I notice you seem to have the need to respond to every single ever-lovin' one of them.

    How 'bout you take a short vacation. Try to relax. Dropping the snark would be best for you, and all regressives (and all Gen-X for that matter), since no one, and I mean no one, thinks it's smart or effective.

    Then try your best to not do the ad hominem thing. For one, it's a logical fallacy. And for another? See the above on snark.

    There. Fixed it for ya. Come back in a month or three, when you've regained your senses.

    I recommend the same for the writer of this article.

    Virtue signalling causes cognitive disonance. Companies want to drive down wages. They don't give a shit about being "inhumane."

    Wake up. Listen to the gigantic sucking sound.

    Of Americans with 50,000-dollar student loans taken for degrees in computer science who are being totally fucked by all the companies filing amicus briefs in this case.

    Pull the virtual signalling nonsense from your eyes.

    See ya when you talk less and think more, AC

  • Feb 6th, 2017 @ 10:32am

    Re: Re: More Cognitive Dissonance from Tech Dirt

    Odd since right wingers seldom if never virtue signal. Only the cognitively dissonant regressives do that. Every day, 24/7.

    You're doing it right now, in fact, because all it takes is 10 seconds for you to find hundreds of examples of it.

    Start with the article this thread is a part of.

    Count the number of times that you can find "inhumane."

    Hope this helps you, but I doubt it will.

  • Feb 6th, 2017 @ 7:38am

    More Cognitive Dissonance from Tech Dirt

    The obvious reason that all of those tech companies jumped into the fray so quickly is they are scared to death they may have to pay American tech workers good wages.

    Trump is legally entitled to limit immigration entry, as have almost all other Presidents in living memory and before.

    Instaad, the writer of this article is so blind to the reality of the order and the laws of the land and so intent on virtue signaling his moral outrage, that he misses the obvious, which, by the way, Tech Dirt has spoken out about countless times.

    Both the writer of this piece and those companies intentions can be summed up by Shakespeare: Methinks the lady doth protest too much.

More comments from restless94110 >>