DJ 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (757)

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:43pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  aaaaaand cue the asshole who thinks that the world revolves around him and nobody should EVER be offended by anything he does, but rather he be offended by EVERYTHING EVERYONE ELSE does...
  
  "...would you be more offended if I told you to go fuck yourself?"

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:39pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Hats

  "It's not the proper function of government to impose restrictions on the liberty of the citizenry in order to enforce some arbitrary notion of manners or "rudeness"."
  
  The single most insightful thing I've EVER read on this site. Bravo!
  Another way to say that is that the role of government is to protect equal rights, not provide equal things.

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:36pm

  Re:

  Bart, y apparently have been completely absent from society for the past twenty or so years. As Michael said, it USED to be incredibly rude. Nowadays, it's quite common to see people wearing hats indoors. So yes, it's changed. If you are a private business owner, you have to right to refuse customers who do not live up to your personal dress codes. A public library, however, is, by definition, NOT privately owned.
  As for sunglasses indoors, you have apparently NEVER worn sunglasses, because you think that they completely blind you (this is NOT what makes blind people blind).

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:23pm

  Re: It's cheaper...

  Which doesn't have anything, directly, to do with banning clothing items.

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:21pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Eye surgery

  "It's 106 miles to Chicago...."

• On the post: Surveillance Nation: Austin Library Won't Let You Wear Baseball Caps Because Cameras Can't ID You

  

  DJ ( profile ), 28 Sep, 2010 @ 02:18pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

  People who just don't want to be identified at a place with so many instruments of evil knowledge...

• On the post: Users Revolt Over Blizzard's Requirement Of 'Real Names' In Forum Comments

  

  DJ ( profile ), 08 Jul, 2010 @ 05:32pm

  Re: Re:

  "If that happens they'll get sued for infringement. Free market capitalism indeed."
  
  Umm, huh? Setting aside for a moment that this string has nothing to do with the topic at hand; unless I'm misunderstanding it, that argument makes no sense. It sounds as though you are arguing that copyright laws (and the misuse thereof) are proof that free market capitalism is a failure. If not, then stop reading my post here.
  The reason free market capitalism is "failing" has nothing at all to do with free markets or capitalism at all. It's because douchebags keep regulating shit that shouldn't be regulated, which makes the market fail, and then saying "see! it doesn't work! we need MORE regulation!"
  /#tangent.

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 05:12pm

  Re: Re: Re: Re:

  absolutely nothing, which is why I acknowledged, albeit vaguely, the change in subject.

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 02:08pm

  Re: Stephen Mitchell

  "Stephen Mitchell, who is also a poet, created his own 'translation' of the Tao Te Ching. He wrote it himself. Yes, it is based on his reading of the ancient text. Mitchell's work, published in the early and mid-90's, is clearly a derivative work based on a text in the public domain -- but it is clearly not equivalent to the public domain text itself"
  
  If that is the case, then two things are instantly evident:
  1)Mr. Dyer is in violation of current copyright laws
  2)Mr. Mitchell should somehow have made it clear ON THE COVER, that his book was not an attempt at a direct translation

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 02:03pm

  Re: Hilarious

  Thanks for the opinion about the work itself. How about contributing to the argument now?

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 01:58pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  No. No one is saying that either of them is prohibited from expressing their respective religions.

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 01:56pm

  Re: Re:

  I'll take your bait, and run on this tangent.
  
  It takes VASTLY more faith to believe that the exact right series of events and situations just randomly occured in the exact right sequences. You'd think that if it happened once billions of years ago, it would have happened AT LEAST once more...but it hasn't...not even once. THAT is a fact.

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 01:48pm

  Re:

  Or what if I just "alter the meaning":
  
  "Copyrights can't be applied to a translated work? I'm overjoyed that that issue has been resolved."
  
  That's what this argument is about; the copyright infringment of an interpretation....

• On the post: Copyright Infringement Charged Over Tao Te Ching… Which Is Only Two Millennia Old

  

  DJ ( profile ), 26 May, 2010 @ 01:46pm

  Re:

  Ttraducciones no pueden ser propiedad? Me alegro de que está arreglado.

• On the post: Student Sues School For Privacy Invasion After School Found Nude Photos On Her Phone

  

  DJ ( profile ), 24 May, 2010 @ 05:19pm

  Re:

  I agree...to a point. I know that there are many schools, both public and private, whose charters specifically state that they are allowed to do searches like that; naturally, the parents are required to sign something saying that they've read this.
  There are a lot of unknowns -- at least as far as the general public goes -- in this case.

• On the post: Student Sues School For Privacy Invasion After School Found Nude Photos On Her Phone

  

  DJ ( profile ), 24 May, 2010 @ 05:08pm

  Re: returning a lost cellphone

  I once lost my phone and didn't know it. I found out because someone looked at my most called list and called.
  I was GRATEFUL!!
  Now get off your high horses

• On the post: Student Sues School For Privacy Invasion After School Found Nude Photos On Her Phone

  

  DJ ( profile ), 24 May, 2010 @ 05:07pm

  Re: Re: Re:

  That's an entirely new ball of wax. Let's not open that one today. plz?

• On the post: Feds Look At Jamming Mobile Phones In Prison

  

  DJ ( profile ), 13 May, 2010 @ 06:29pm

  The real question...

  Does it matter? The answer depends on the level of conviction. For example, convicted felons are henceforth stripped of certain societal privelages. Some are restored when they are release (like driving); some are not (LIKE VOTING, [let's keep it that way]).
  Those serving time for "lesser crimes", however, have all of their privelages restored when they're released.
  There are also a lot of other contraband items that aren't allowed in prison. Few, if any, however, allow them to directly contactthe outside world. To which I say: Jam the phones! They're in fucking prison, not the Hilton! The reason they're there is because they violated the law, and life is SUPPOSED to be tough! Fuck 'em!

• On the post: Feds Look At Jamming Mobile Phones In Prison

  

  DJ ( profile ), 13 May, 2010 @ 06:13pm

  Re: Root Problem

  Yeah cuz cell phones are the first contraband ever to get into a prison......

• On the post: Attorneys General Upset That Craigslist Is Profiting From Procedure He Forced Craigslist To Put In Place

  

  DJ ( profile ), 27 Apr, 2010 @ 11:41am

  Re: Given it to Blumenthal?

  Well duh! He may have gotten his start in the legal community, but now he's a politician.
  Why are you surprised?

Next >>