I can't believe how many people I've seen at sites like reddit saying that these miners might be a good alternate to web ads, it's like they can't think ahead a few steps.
For the non-computer literate, here's why bitcoin mining in place of ads is a bad idea, even with user permission.
We're not talking about just one site using it. We're talking about the potential for many of the websites you visit to start using it in place of ads. Even people with top of the line computers will find their computers brought to it's knees if they have enough websites open running crypto-currency miners.
What's to stop people from just running crypo-currency miners? This loophole to covertly mine crypo-currency is a GREAT way for a would be hacker to potentially do other malicious things to your computer to. I GUARANTEE you we'll hear about some nasty virus in the future disguising itself as a mining app.
This is why I immediately added Crypo-currency mining to my block list in uBlock Origin the second I heard of the first story of these miner leeches.
Not always, but the NYT that fought all the way to the SCOTUS for the right to publish the Pentagon Papers is long dead today.
All that's left is an impostor baring the NYT's name.
Given that it's a port of an old game, I'm sure you can already find pirated copies of the original on the Internet.
So what exactly did Sega think they were going to accomplish with DRM on a game that was already pirated years ago? A pirate can just download a pirate of the original and run it with an emulator. There's no need for a pirate to pirate their new PC port of the game at all.
Never forget, Al Franken was a big supporter of SOPA & PIPA.
That alone should be enough proof that Al Franken doesn't understand the Internet and how it works. No one who understands the Internet and how it works would have ever backed SOPA or PIPA for even a moment.
and they probably don't use ad blockers.
... Yeah... given how young the audience is of the Youtube Kids site, I'd imagine their parents would install ad blockers for them.
... Seriously?
Print publishers like newspapers actually hire the writers who write stuff, they have editors to review everything. Even letters to the editor/etc. that papers publish had to be reviewed and pre-approved to appear in the paper.
Web sites do not. Any discussion forum, even Techdirt's, lets people post whatever the hell they want with oversight to prevent bad content from ever appearing. It's been explained in countless previous articles at techdirt why making websites review and approve of posts before they show up won't work. It's too expensive, and many sites, especially those owned by giant big names, get WAY too much content for it to ever be viable for them to have someone personally read and review every single piece of new content submitted.
Except for the fact that, you know, SOPA didn't pass, so this ruling is illegal.
And that the CCIA tried to tell the idiot judge that in an amicus brief.
Also, this ruling effects more than just the defendant, it's a ruling against a ton of third parties who weren't even a part of the lawsuit.
It's disgraceful that Silicon Valley has her a representative in the senate, when she so constantly tries to fuck them over in the name of national security.
It would be like Texas electing an environmental activist to the senate who purposely tried to screw over their state's oil industry in the name of solar and wind energy.
The craziest part of this is it's not that far from the truth. Watch John Oliver's segment on Sinclair if you've never heard of them. The kind of content they force local news stations to put on the news (while pretending that it's local news) is just right-wing propaganda. The guy who Oliver shows who rants about college students is incredibly offensive. And this is what people are seeing on local news, as if it's just another late night Fox News talking head.
If their monopoly gets much bigger they're guaranteeing an actual pro-consumer administration will break them & Comcast apart.
Or potentially even worse from their perspective, start regulating ISP's and Cell Phones as a utility.
Not to mention the whole need for it doesn't make sense in most trade deals.
ISDS were created for use in 3rd world countries with a history of a corrupt government that might have a history of just deciding to seize a business's property in their country just because they can. The 3rd world countries agree to ISDS because without it literally no one will invest money in their country.
The countries in a deal like NAFTA include much better off countries then that. And none of the US/Canada/Mexico has a history of corrupt behavior like that, none of them have problems where foreign investors refuse to invest in those countries out of fear of a corrupt government seizing their assets.
Using ISDS in every trade deal, for every country is like inventing crutches for someone with a broken leg, and then requiring everyone use crutches to get around, even if both their legs work perfectly fine. Why would anyone do such a stupid thing?
Not to mention labeling environmental activists 'terrorists' while NOT labeling almost all the mass shootings in the US terrorism or domestic terrorism makes a mockery of the 'terrorist' label.
Terrorism is about using fear and violence, or threats of violence, to accomplish your political goals. Most environmental activists don't fall under either category.
It's true!
I played a majorly evil Chaotic Evil alignment bad guy in my D&D games. My character went around murdering peasants and raping women and children! My character even stabbed his own party members in the back and murdered them just to keep all the loot for his greedy self!
And now look at me! I'm... a perfectly ordinary adult with no criminal record who hasn't raped or killed a single person...
A thing called Gerrymandering makes certain that most politicians are safe from the wrath of the public.
It's a neat little thing that lets politicians pick their voters, and pick voters who they know will loyally elect a blue or red politician no matter what.
No, it's giving us lots of freedom to be screwed by letting ISP's jack up our prices even farther and give us even crappier service!
Don't you love the freedom to be screwed over by giant corporations that pay Washington to take away those unnecessary 'consumer protections'?
The arguments by ISP's and their political hacks about how these proposals 'save' taxpayers money shows how wrongly most people think about taxpayer money.
Lack of ISP competition costs taxpayers a lot through their slow Internet connection, and the monopoly pricing the ISPs can charge them for garbage service and speed. It makes the whole area a lot less appealing for businesses to, which costs taxpayers even more money long term (though indirectly).
So yes, allowing governments to spend money on better ISP infrastructure is a good use of taxpayer dollar, and it SAVES taxpayer money, even if it might require raising taxes to pay for it. It's like paying up an extra $10 in taxes to save $20 on your ISP bill all while improving your quality of life and making your community more attractive for businesses.
That's the very point of being against those proposed laws. When the laws are so ridiculously broad that the average American commits 3 felonies a day without even realizing it, you have a major problem. The police could throw literally anyone in jail and find something that would stick. Also...
The rules are simple... break the law or assist someone in breaking the law, you are a criminal too. Hard to figure this out? I thought you guys where the "educated" ones?... Did you even read the entire article? Specifically this part.
People in the EU who've merely given rides to Syrian (and other) refugees tired from trekking on foot have been prosecuted for trafficking. Yes that's Europe, not the US, but it's an example of how well-intentioned trafficking laws can easily be over-applied to the point that they invite absurd results, including those that end up making immigrants even more vulnerable to traffickers than they would have been without the laws.In other words, passing SESTA in the name of stopping human trafficking is like passing a rape prevention bill that will cause more people to be raped. What good is a law that will fail to accomplish it's stated goal, while causing a slew of unintended side effects?
Story time, I think part of why the ISP's don't like this is because they're so incompetent that their own internal maps are wrong.
Years ago the business I worked at wanted to upgrade to get Verizon FIOS. But we were told repeatedly that it wasn't available in our area. This was despite the fact that:
Our next door neighbor, a dental office, already had FIOS.
After some arguing with them over the phone we finally got them to send a technician out, to verify that their maps were wrong and we could get FIOS.
But the best part? A few years later we got a knock on our door from a Verizon salesman, asking us if we wanted to upgrade to the FIOS we already had!
So yes, despite them having several years to fix their maps, and being told by us that FIOS was available in the area, and despite the fact that we were paying for it, Verizon was incompetent enough to send a salesman to our door offering to sell it to us.
Re: Google, for example, keeps TENS OF BILLIONS UNTAXED offshore!
Yes, let the ISPs get away with stealing billions in subsidies and tax breaks from the rest of us with false promises of "we really mean it this time" about upgrading their infrastructure.
Why? Because... LOOK AT GOOGLE!
If only the police worked like that, then I could get away with all sorts of crime by going "LOOK AT BIN LADEN! LOOK AT ENRON!" and running away.