sumgai 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (1098) comment rss

  • On the post: FBI Ignored Its Own Warrant And Search Policies To Seize Millions From People's Safety Deposit Boxes

    sumgai ( profile ), 16 Jun, 2021 @ 02:19pm

    Thinking on this some more....

    It seems to me that the FBI didn't rob just the individual box holders, they also robbed the company providing the service. Unless the contract for services was written with some very fine print, then they quite likely are on the hook to reimburse those folks. Very sadly for USPV, if they had insurance (and they were probably required to by law), they're not going to be happy - it's a de facto standard of the insurance industry that no "authorized legal activity" is insurable, full stop.

    Oh my, I think the courts are going to see all kinds of action in the near future. Could be time to re-stock my pile of Amish popcorn.

  • On the post: AT&T Whines About Biden Focus On Community Broadband

    sumgai ( profile ), 16 Jun, 2021 @ 01:43pm

    ^^^ And that would be because the money for those repiars and such went where it should never have gone in the first place, as pointed out by AC in the very first response.

  • On the post: Police Union, Lax Oversight Allow Florida Cop To Survive Three Arrests And Seven Firings

    sumgai ( profile ), 15 Jun, 2021 @ 04:12pm

    If he'd been a civilian with this kind of record, he'd've been locked up for life as a serial offender, a long time ago.

  • On the post: Hypocrisy: Rupert Murdoch Has Always Hated Antitrust; But Now He Wants It Used Against Internet Companies Who Out Innovated Him

    sumgai ( profile ), 15 Jun, 2021 @ 08:32am

    Re:

    The 'garden variety' will eventually wander off into the sunset, mumbling about people who fail to "get it". The 'extreme' class will continue to double down until you become innurred to the bullshit and walk way, mumbling about batshit-crazy ass-hats.

  • On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation

    sumgai ( profile ), 15 Jun, 2021 @ 11:37am

    Having read the Bill itself (as linked) to research a response above, I found this particular tidbit interesting;

    [from Section 2, subsection (f), paragraph (3)]

    (3) REPEAT OFFENDERS.--If the fact finder determines that a covered platform has engaged in a pattern or practice of violating this Act, the court shall consider requiring that the Chief Executive Officer forfeit to the United States Treasury any compensation received by that person during the 12 months preceding or following the filing of a complaint for an alleged violation of this Act.

    Seems to me that someones wants to codify a way to more easily pierce the corporate veil, no?, But horrifically, it states "any compensation", not just some random percentage keyed to how much money the CEO made per the actual offense. That's stupifying right there. Like as in, every CEO would immediately shutter all possible places where one or more persons could post.... as in, post anything - blog responses, advertisements, lists, anything at all. Thus quoted each and every CEO: "Not in my wallet you don't!"

    Thus rendering the Internet null and void after barely reaching nascent adulthood. Sad. JUST. FUCKING. SAD.

  • On the post: If David Cicilline Gets His Way; It Would Destroy Content Moderation

    sumgai ( profile ), 15 Jun, 2021 @ 11:11am

    There is no subsection (f)(4)(i)-(iii).
    Now in (g)(4)(B)(i)-(iii).....but then, it's not referenced in main text

    True, but then again, I don't see anywhere in TFA that either section, or their contents, are referenced.

  • On the post: Hypocrisy: Rupert Murdoch Has Always Hated Antitrust; But Now He Wants It Used Against Internet Companies Who Out Innovated Him

    sumgai ( profile ), 14 Jun, 2021 @ 01:56pm

    Re:

    Are you going somewhere with that statement, or did did you slip out of your wrangler's grasp in the wrong thread? You're this close to earning a Abuse/Spam/Troll click, but I'd thought I'd be nice and ask first.....

  • On the post: DOJ Says It's Time To Add Ransomware Attacks To The Ever Expanding 'War On Terror'

    sumgai ( profile ), 12 Jun, 2021 @ 08:35am

    Sorry, but where electricity runs the respirator, the internet does NOT run the computer. I deduce that you missed the whole point of 'air gap'. Try looking up "computer security", you might get a clue.

  • On the post: DOJ Says It's Time To Add Ransomware Attacks To The Ever Expanding 'War On Terror'

    sumgai ( profile ), 11 Jun, 2021 @ 02:03pm

    If it's too sensitive/critical to allow even a momentary outage, why in the name of Gawd is it connected to the internet, public facing or otherwise??? Has everyone supposedly in charge forgotten the meaning of 'air gap'?

    I should think that The Forbin Project would be required lecture material in a good CS program, the thrust being the danger of interconnectivity just because it's possible, and not for any good reason.

    Ramifications, people, ramifications! Geez, Louise.

  • On the post: Why The Ninth Circuit's Decision In Lemmon V. Snap Is Wrong On Section 230 And Bad For Online Speech

    sumgai ( profile ), 09 Jun, 2021 @ 08:34am

    Re: Re:

    I should've used the car analogy. But in my defense, I was indeed a Party C, many year ago. I mean, I even saw it coming, and still couldn't get out of the way fast enough. Bad times. Yes, state laws do vary, but in the main, the chain of evidence usually proves to be most easy to follow if one doesn't attempt to jump/skip over pieces of evidence. In that manner, a court can find the proper ration of justice for each party.

  • On the post: Ohio Files Bizarre And Nonsensical Lawsuit Against Google, Claiming It's A Common Carrier; But What Does That Even Mean?

    sumgai ( profile ), 09 Jun, 2021 @ 08:22am

    Re:

    Which would be stupidly retarded.
    You sound as if don't know that most State legislators and Congress are indeed 'stupidly retarded'. Need I provide proof?

  • On the post: Ohio Files Bizarre And Nonsensical Lawsuit Against Google, Claiming It's A Common Carrier; But What Does That Even Mean?

    sumgai ( profile ), 08 Jun, 2021 @ 10:31pm

    Will someone please spray the place again? All I can smell just now is more Jim Hood, and that shit stinks something awful!

  • On the post: Why The Ninth Circuit's Decision In Lemmon V. Snap Is Wrong On Section 230 And Bad For Online Speech

    sumgai ( profile ), 08 Jun, 2021 @ 07:26pm

    While this is a civil case (wrongful death), it is my experience that such cases often come about when a criminal case cannot be sustained. (In this case, the proximate perpetrator died.) Now, if he had lived, the State would have charged him with criminal manslaughter, at the least. Supposing he presented a defense of "But Snapchat made me do it", that would've been dismissed for one simple reason: Each and every State in the Union has a simple declaratory rule upon issuing a driver's license (usually formally called an Operator's License (or permit)): "You as a driver in control of a motor vehicle must assume and accept total responsibility for your actions while in charge of said vehicle. There are no exceptions to this rule."

    Court cases have abounded over the years, pondering this law and how it should/must be applied to contested situations. But the fact of the matter is, regardless of any distractions whatsoever, you are responsible for your actions, plain and simple. You can claim all you want that "The devil made me do it!", and no matter what guise the devil may take, you're still responsible, end of story. Snapchat's defense should rest on only one ideal - "This kid was breaking the law, and we made no inducements to persuade him to do to. He abdicated his personal responsibility to the State of his own volition, and we should not be used as a substitute for restitution to a harmed party..... particularly when we had no prior agreement between ourselves any of the remaining parties to this action."

    It is a given in law that no party can be made to assume responsibility for another without a prior agreement (usually in writing). If Party A strikes Party B, and in falling down Party B strikes Party C, Party C cannot directly capture Party A for damages, instead he must go through Party B, the most direct proximate case of the tort. (The sole exception is parent/child relations.)

    Now to the heart of the matter. The car maker analogy is a good one. If we start making third parties suffer the consequences of our (STUPID) actions, then we might as well go back to the cave man days, because a man's word is no longer his bond. By no rational person's personal gauge are we a civilized society if one can point his finger at another person and shift the blame/guilt in that manner. That is heresy of the highest order, and morally reprehensible.

    But legal?? It is starting to look that way, isn't it. Sigh.

    Side comment: On the face of it, this case deserves adjudication. But if we get crass and look at the underside, we see that it's nothing more than "muh feelz". Which then says that the case is a direct result of:

    a) Too fucking many lawyers, most of them acting like ambulance chasers;

    and

    b) Judges refusing to meaningfully punish lawyers who continually prove that George Santyana was correct.

    tl;dr:

    Final scorecard for Snapchat: A for effort, but F for lack of validity.
    Attempting to side-track the actual issue does not often win the day. The issue was never about speech, it is, and will always be, about personal responsibility.

  • On the post: European Commission Betrays Internet Users By Cravenly Introducing Huge Loophole For Copyright Companies In Upload Filter Guidance

    sumgai ( profile ), 08 Jun, 2021 @ 10:18am

    Re:

    You might be unpleasantly surprised to learn that the driving force behind the whole charade of updating the EU Copyright Directive was Axel Springer Publishing House. To gain an understanding of just how much influence they wielded, look them up and study their history for a few moments. Then, just for giggles, look up the current CEO of Axel Springer, Mathias Döpfner. Makes most Hollywood MafiAA basturds look like kindergarten chumps.

  • On the post: As Western Democracies Ramp Up Efforts To Censor Social Media, Russia Appears To Feel Emboldened To Do More Itself

    sumgai ( profile ), 04 Jun, 2021 @ 04:01pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Other Way Around

    .... [just because] assholes can't shit-post as they see fit.
    You're assuming that assholes can see fit in the first place. I'm afraid that not much else in life can be further from the truth. First, that implies that assholes can see anything, and the very fact that we have to identify them as assholes from the get-go says a lot about how much they can see. Second, their definition of "fit" means nothing more than an emphatic exhibition of constipation of the brain and diarrhea of the mouth. Thus, they "see fit" just about all of the time that they aren't sleeping. It's too bad that all the shit-posting has no consequences to speak of.
    Shit-posters. You can't argue with 'em, you can't lock 'em away, and you can't kill 'em - what's a law-abiding netizen to do???
    I ignore them, because bad speech is NOT countered by more speech, that's like tugging on Superman's cape, or flashing swords with Zorro - the outcome ain't gonna be to your liking. Besides, they just drag you down to their level, and then beat you with vast experience.

  • On the post: Now That Amazon Has Bought MGM, Will It Turn Against The Internet?

    sumgai ( profile ), 04 Jun, 2021 @ 11:22am

    Re: Re: Re:ot

    Strange how people can look at the same facts and see very different things.
    No, not strange in the least - that's the very definition of our adversarial system of justice. But here's the rub.... I read the complaint, and I'm pretty sure that I'm not the only one laughing, almost to tears, at what the complaint alleges is covered by a patent. "That is only a 33% utilization of storage capacity". (A direct quote.) As if this guy had ever even spelled "data manager", let alone had been employed as one. I mean, can you honestly look your boss in the face after a data corruption disaster and tell him/her that "No, I didn't save any further back than one iteration, that'd be a waste of disk space." Even PHB's know about Grandfather-Father-Son backup schemes. And that's because they know their collective asses are on the line, should an "event" occur that would affect the bottom line in a not-so-desirable way.

  • On the post: Trump Bans Himself From His Own Blog; Upset That Everyone Mocked Its Terrible Traffic

    sumgai ( profile ), 02 Jun, 2021 @ 07:00pm

    < ... just to make him look foolish.

    You can't be serious, implying that he needs help in that regard....

    Otherwise he'd have to admit incompetence and a lack of public interest in what he has to say.

    That was the entire point of TFA - he did just admit that very thing, by shutting down the site.

    As Frank Zappa would've said: "Well, that's a few million electrons that don't have to be embarrassed by the message they're carrying."

  • On the post: Amazon's Idea For A Mesh Network Is Cool; Its Method Of Rolling It Out Is Not

    sumgai ( profile ), 01 Jun, 2021 @ 08:55pm

    Re:

    I think it gets even better than that.... "Your Honor, sir, my wi-fi connection to the internet is locked down the way a bunch of websites tell me I should do it, so it should be secure against intrusion. At least, that's what they tell me on the "techie" sites. But recently Amazon opted me into a mesh network, and I don't know how anyone could've accessed my router, and thus my internet connection, except via that new mesh thingie. That means it could've been any one of my 4 dozen neighbors, and I certainly don't have the knowledge to figure out who it might've been, but I can guarantee that it wasn't me who downloaded that porn!"

  • On the post: Experts Fear Biden Broadband Plan Won't Fix The Real Problem: Monopolization

    sumgai ( profile ), 01 Jun, 2021 @ 10:05am

    Re: Re:

    Damn, this particular thread is starting to sound more and more like Rollerball, the 1975 version. (Although I can't deny that Rebecca Romijn sure added some "spice" to the remake.)

  • On the post: Experts Fear Biden Broadband Plan Won't Fix The Real Problem: Monopolization

    sumgai ( profile ), 01 Jun, 2021 @ 10:00am

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    Mobile is competitive....
    Voted most funny of the week!
    ... because it serves mobile users who expect the service to be available wherever they happen to go....
    Which is why fixed service has effectively dried up and blown away. It's that very concept of convenience (no matter where a person is in geographical relation to the planet) that fixed can't provide, thus.... QED.
    ... and that has prevented local monopolies in the provision of mobile service..
    Perhaps you aren't aware of who owns who in the Mobile Telecomm field, eh? Hint: only three (big) companies are in play, and they own absolutely all of the little guys - sometimes openly, sometimes not. Rest assured, they're all in cahoots when it comes to acting like competitors, but in reality they exhibit every characteristic of an oligarchy. (Meaning in this case, a few very rich companies are putting on a good show for the public, and laughing up their collective sleeve all the way to the bank.)

Next >>