takitus’s Techdirt Profile

takitus

About takitus




takitus’s Comments comment rss

  • May 18th, 2018 @ 6:01am

    Morality theater

    The 16-digit cards will allow browsers to avoid giving personal details online when asked to prove their age.

    16 digits? Is this the return of the software CD key which did such a wonderful job of preventing people from copying things 20 years ago?

    In all probability this system has already been cracked.

  • Apr 27th, 2018 @ 9:32am

    Hurray for 'functional equivalence'

    If these discs have been ruled to be equivalent in value and function to licensed copies of Microsoft software, does that mean unlicensed MS software is defective? If all of the value here is contained in the software (which is what this verdict seems to be claiming), how is it reasonable for Microsoft to sell “broken” copies which can be “fixed” for a license fee?

    Value, according to this court, seems to be some immanent essence that exists not only in software, nor in licenses, but in all things—or, at least, in whatever thing is most convenient for maximizing Microsoft’s copyright claims.

  • Apr 26th, 2018 @ 9:09am

    Re:

    As reasonable as it seems, it’s clearly an attempt to present the usual MPAA line in terms of the current panic. The second sentence (“The problem is endemic…”) is key—it’s basically a familiar attempt to portray the Internet as a Wild West that needs to be brought into line. Minus the “personal information” wrinkle, this is the same talking point that Hollywood was using 10 years ago to attack file-sharing services.

    This kind of co-opting unfortunately muddies the waters. There’s no way in hell that the copyright-enforcement lobby is a friend of Internet privacy, but, with statements like these, they’re cynically trying to cast themselves in that light.

  • Apr 19th, 2018 @ 6:57pm

    Re: Cutting the onions

    AFAIK, it is literally impossible to block access to an onion domain, unless you bring down the entire Tor network.

    Exactly. Apparently lawyers attempting to get domains seized can’t be troubled to learn anything about DNS.

  • Apr 12th, 2018 @ 12:19pm

    Re:

    Flagged as irrelevant trollbait.

  • Mar 13th, 2018 @ 11:38am

    Re: Trump's usefulness

    Dark Helmet,

    I can’t see how your comment contributes much beyond an attempt to spark yet another Trump v. Clinton flamefest of the type usually started by blue and his cohorts. The point of Mike’s article, it seems, was not to debate the relative moral worth of politicians, but to point out the obvious threat posed by a politician who attempts to silence someone who might publicly embarass them.

    Given that you regularly contribute to this site, I’m disappointed by what seem to be a troll-baiting comment.

  • Mar 8th, 2018 @ 10:18pm

    We have the solution!

    Apparently:

    Censor drug-related Web searches → no more opioid crisis!

    Censor porn on the Web → no more sex trafficking!

    Censor searches involving the keywords “army”, “missile”, “rifle”, etc. → world peace at last!

    It turns out the physical world never actually had any problems. It was just the Web giving people the idea to screw it up.

    /s

  • Mar 5th, 2018 @ 6:07pm

    Re: Re: stupidity

    The irony of the above comment is that this advice (“The WORST thing you can do…”) is probably pretty familiar to most of us—it’s the best way to act when faced with a violent criminal.

  • Feb 28th, 2018 @ 12:03pm

    The flexibility of "hateful"

    The Chinese Government’sAHEM People’s Daily also makes this interesting comment:

    “It is not only an offense, but even more so, it’s a challenge to the Chinese people. Needless to say, it’s hateful.”

    This is an obvious lesson in how flexible the definition of “hate speech” is in the hands of clever propagandists. Even an uncited quote encouraging broad-mindedness can be spun as hateful, given enough Orwellian oomph.

  • Feb 28th, 2018 @ 11:43am

    Re: Re: Re:

    Apparently China’s dystopian future is just Disney’s Toontown.

    It’s funny how often “save the children” is subject to mission creep.

  • Feb 26th, 2018 @ 3:59pm

    Re: “The same shall be forwarded within 20 days via email in Microsoft Word format to the Court...”

    Yeah, that part of the letter was facepalm-worthy. We’ve finally nailed Microsoft to something like an open standard, and it would be nice if government officials wouldn’t implicitly demand people buy their stupid software.

  • Feb 23rd, 2018 @ 9:57pm

    Incompetence

    Requiring people to carry encrypted ID info and doing nothing to authenticate this data is worse than providing no encryption at all.

    Depending on how seriously the CBP takes the data on these chips, this means a competent attacker with a few hours’ access to your password can put you on a no-fly list, or worse. At the very least, you will appear to have tampered with super-serious documents.

    This could provide a new definition for a popular, stupid idea: Responsible Encryption™—when our incompetent security measures fail, guess who’s responsible?

  • Feb 14th, 2018 @ 11:19am

    Re: hypothetical

    The answer is quite possibly “no different at all”. Unless the site owners (let alone the users!) of a modern script-heavy site have taken the time to check the multitude of (probably obfuscated) JavaScript they run for vulnerabilities, questionable requests and even suspicious busy loops, pretty much anything could be running in a user's browser. Clearly most site admins aren’t doing much checking.

    As other commentators have noted, a browser’s sandbox cannot prevent a script from doing arbitrary number crunching. Mining blockers like NoCoin block known mining scripts, but this blacklisting approach can’t stop “trusted” (but compromised) scripts from mining while ostensibly sliding widgets around.

    The popular computing world accepts that a modern Web browser must run every piece of JavaScript thrown at it. Correspondingly, Web browsers have become enormously complex programs with code-line counts on the order of entire operating systems, which users must, nevertheless, trust to protect them from tons of arbitrary code. And the Web development world has decided that more, not less JavaScript is the solution to their customers’ problems. I think it’s fair to say that no one has a clear idea what’s going on when they use the modern Web.

  • Jan 29th, 2018 @ 6:13pm

    (untitled comment)

    The best way to do this, the memo argues, is for the government to build a network itself. It would then rent access to carriers like AT&T, Verizon and T-Mobile.

    The good news is that reading this probably gave Pai a minor heart attack.

  • Jan 25th, 2018 @ 1:09pm

    If you’re technologically incompetent, blame social media!

    If Facebook wants to recognize ‘trusted’ publishers then it should pay those publishers a carriage fee similar to the model adopted by cable companies.

    This demonstrates a laughably naive understanding of the Web. Since Facebook users (not Facebook) are the ones who post links to Murdoch content, the only way to implement his carriage fee idea would be some sort of “link tax” charged to each user who attempts to copy a URI from a Murdoch site. This would obviously have nothing to do with the big, bad social media giants Murdoch is bashing, but apparently jumping on bandwagons is fun.

    If Murdoch wants to use EME or something similar to charge Web users from sharing News Corp. content, he will be guaranteed to outlive his media empire. With this level of technological incompetence, it’s no suprise that MySpace is long dead.

  • Jan 19th, 2018 @ 10:14am

    Priorities

    Apparently “A basic understanding of IP” does not include an understanding of basic concepts like fair use or the public domain, let alone any of modern alternatives to copyright maximalism—Creative Commons, et al.

    Apparently the creators of this nonsense also don’t consider it a problem if children who believe their bullshit stop using Wikipedia or other open/free resources because “it is stealing”. Is there also a video about how creators who use free content licenses are villains destroying the market for copyright maximalists?

    No matter what your definition of education, this is a disservice to any person interested in learning. An educational organization that doesn’t protest this spreading of FUD in its classrooms is not really concerned with education.

  • Nov 27th, 2017 @ 5:03pm

    Re: Re: Couldn't happen to a nicer guy

    Because they must dismantle everything obama did, sort of like a petulant child throwing a tantrum at the store because they can not have that candy or toy or ice cream (two scoops).

    One of the primary points of Mike's article is that there has been (and is) broad support for net neutrality among members of both major parties. To bring Barack Obama into it muddies the waters, as the “Obama-FCC power grab!” brigade well knows.

  • Nov 16th, 2017 @ 6:12am

    Re: It is a less intrusive model than advertising

    This raises an interesting question—if a web service is going to waste cycles, would you rather have those cycles go toward mining currency or your browsing habits? Resource usage being equal, the former might be preferable.

    That said, I’d hardly call it “nice” to be asked to “allocate a core” for currency mining to view a bit of HTML.

  • Oct 18th, 2017 @ 1:13pm

    Re:

    How is Disney’s ability to exploit its intellectual monopolies harmed by this company? As another commentator pointed out, Disney isn’t in the party-entertainment business, so this really amounts to free publicity for Disney products.

  • Oct 18th, 2017 @ 1:08pm

    Re: It's about a deterrent, not this individual company

    it's a perfectly sensible exercise of copyright for the copyright holder to nevertheless pursue such a case as a warning to any random schmuck that wants to trade off Disney's IP without paying for it.

    A more sensible exercise would be to send the sort of cease-and-desist boilerplate. Or they could issue a polite demand that the company obtain a license, with the contact info for the appropriate Disney official.

    Or they could just thank them for the free advertising.

More comments from takitus >>