Thad’s Techdirt Profile

thad

About Thad Techdirt Insider




Thad’s Comments comment rss

  • Sep 19th, 2019 @ 9:17am

    Re: Won't someone think of the children?

    That's pretty close to a canned "won't someone think of the children?" response.

    In that it is exactly a canned "won't someone think of the children?" response, yes.

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 1:47pm

    Re: Re: Re: Re:

    various bad people get away with it all the time.

    If they advertise a business venture explicitly intended to launder money owed to the CIA and NSA, they don't generally get away with it for very long.

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 1:38pm

    Re:

    There's a difference between "not a fan" and "this should be legally prohibited." I don't trust the US Congress to legislate web design patterns.

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 11:12am

    Re:

    It's Missouri. All you have to do to get elected senator is have an (R) next to your name and avoid using the phrase "legitimate rape".

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 11:10am

    Re:

    I'm sure you can think of ways to criticize Hawley without using a slur against an entire group of people who have nothing to do with this.

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 9:59am

    Re: Re:

    I don't think that a US publisher intentionally routing transactions outside the US to avoid having to pay money it owes to the US government is going to end as well as you seem to think it will.

    Snowden is outside US jurisdiction. His publisher isn't.

  • Sep 18th, 2019 @ 8:53am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:

    ...you...have to be an officeholder to sponsor a bill, dogg.

  • Sep 17th, 2019 @ 10:55am

    Re:

    Hasn't Austria suffered enough?

  • Sep 17th, 2019 @ 10:10am

    Re: Re: Re: Re: Why fight it?

    Having a natural monopoly doesn't hurt either.

  • Sep 17th, 2019 @ 9:09am

    Re: Watergate

    Things have changed since the 1970s. Multiple presidents have done worse things than Watergate (Reagan: Iran-Contra, Bush: lying to make the case for the Iraq War; Trump: Jesus, where do I even start?) and skated.

    Today, we've got a "liberal" media who prize reporting both sides over reporting the truth, a "conservative" media who think both sides is one too many, Democrats who are too craven to risk doing the right thing because they're afraid it might cost them votes, and not one single damn Republican in Congress who has the personal integrity of Barry Goldwater.

  • Sep 17th, 2019 @ 8:35am

    Re: Re: Why fight it?

    You can't buy competition if you don't have any.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 4:08pm

    Re: Can someone explain

    There are rather a lot of non-US citizens who sell products in the US. And a lot of US citizens who sell products outside the US.

    Generally, people from other countries would like to be able to sell their products under their exclusive brand names inside the US -- Harry Potter, Sony, ARM, Hyundai, etc. And people from the US would like to be able to sell their products under their exclusive brand names in other countries. And so, generally, the US enters into trade agreements with those other countries; they'll enforce our copyrights, patents, and trademarks, and we'll enforce theirs.

    It's a lot more complicated than that, of course, but that's the general idea.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 2:02pm

    Re:

    Yeah, that's covered in the article.

    Mike quotes the filing:

    Notably, Guinness World Records then published its 2019 Gamer’s Edition Book (see Figure 1). Titled “THE RECORDS THAT NEVER WERE,” Guinness World Records specifically cites the disqualification of Billy Mitchell’s “highest score on PAC-Man and the first perfect score on PAC-Man.” Following that, Guinness stated that Mitchell’s “submitted scores were obtained while using MAME.” In this statement, not only did Guinness World Records assert that Mitchell’s records, specifically his Pac-man records, “NEVER WERE,” but its use of the generalized phrase, “submitted scores,” also asserted that all his achievements were obtained while using MAME. These statements are factually false.

    And then responds:

    Defamation has to be pretty specific. Merely using a "generalized phrase" that might imply a conclusion that is different than what you want is not defamatory.

    Guinness's wording is, perhaps, imprecise -- it fails to clarify that Mitchell's Pac-Man score has been removed because he submitted a different score that he obtained while using MAME -- but it's pretty hard to see that rising to the level of defamation. The most important point is that Mitchell's scores were removed because he cheated. That they removed his Pac-Man scores because he was caught cheating at Donkey Kong on a separate occasion may be an interesting clarifying detail, but failing to precisely clarify that detail isn't defamation.

    Incidentally, I tried reading the 156-page Evidence Package and...well, it's about what you'd expect. The scanned text is blurry, and the text itself is a damned mess of awkward phrasing, meaningless cliches, and grammatical errors (helpfully including wavy green underlines). I got to page 10 before I gave up. I can't rule out trying to read more of it later, but...jeez. While the letter is at least competently-written enough that I believe an actual law clerk probably wrote it, the "evidence package" reads like a screed from a comments-section troll. I assume Mitchell wrote it himself.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 11:34am

    (untitled comment)

    Apparently, in early 2018, there was a big controversy when Twin Galaxies, who tracks video game records (including for the Guinness Book of World Records), stripped Mitchell of his various records after claiming that an investigation showed evidence that Mitchell did not follow the rules.

    That's a diplomatic way of putting it.

    To summarize the linked articles: analysis of the video where Mitchell scored a million points at Donkey Kong indicates that it was done in MAME (an emulator), not on authentic hardware. And that he very probably save-scummed -- that is, repeatedly saved and reloaded -- to maximize his score (killing enemies with the hammer awards random points; Mitchell consistently got high points with the hammer, which would be extremely unlikely to happen by random chance).

    Mitchell at least seems to be tacitly admitting at this point to the allegation that he used MAME. In this quoted section

    Notably, Guinness World Records then published its 2019 Gamer’s Edition Book (see Figure 1). Titled “THE RECORDS THAT NEVER WERE,” Guinness World Records specifically cites the disqualification of Billy Mitchell’s “highest score on PAC-Man and the first perfect score on PAC-Man.” Following that, Guinness stated that Mitchell’s “submitted scores were obtained while using MAME.” In this statement, not only did Guinness World Records assert that Mitchell’s records, specifically his Pac-man records, “NEVER WERE,” but its use of the generalized phrase, “submitted scores,” also asserted that all his achievements were obtained while using MAME. These statements are factually false.

    he doesn't actually deny ever using MAME; he only denies using it for his perfect Pac-Man game, and other vaguely-defined "achievements".

    I haven't read the entire 156-Page Package (though I admit I'm tempted), but from this excerpt it sounds like maybe he's shifted the goalposts from "I never cheated" to "okay maybe I cheated that one time but my other scores are still valid!"

    Which may well be the case, but the trouble with getting caught cheating is it throws all your scores into doubt.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 10:52am

    Re:

    Wrong tab?

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 8:33am

    Re:

    Under any other administration, this would be a scandal of the first order

    Nah. Just any Democratic one.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 8:31am

    Re: Re: Re:

    It doesn't sound like Colorado Springs really ran a proper experiment and it's not that useful to draw conclusions like you did based on bad data.

    Great. Get back to me when you've run a proper experiment with good data that we can draw useful conclusions from.

  • Sep 16th, 2019 @ 8:22am

    Re: Re: Unless you can come up with a good reason

    Rule of law, as set up by Governments answerable to the people, not by amoral, faceless megacorporations only answerable to their shareholders?

    Which is a fancy way of not answering the question.

  • Sep 13th, 2019 @ 1:31pm

    Re: So to make this clear:

    Yes.

    It was a handout to the meat and dairy industries, who are concerned about losing their market share.

    This is, essentially, a face-saving measure. It allows the legislature to continue to pretend that it was really about protecting customers from confusion.

  • Sep 11th, 2019 @ 12:43pm

    (untitled comment)

    Doc Searls has a great recent blog post in which he rightly points out why Bernie Sanders' "plan to save journalism" is completely misguided and will fail. It's worth reading -- with the key point being that Sanders' plan to save journalism assumes a world that does not exist, and one where heavy regulations will somehow magically save journalism, rather than stifle it.

    I think perhaps if we're going to talk about regulations, it's a good idea to delineate which specific regulations we're talking about.

    A good chunk of Sanders's proposal concerns making it more difficult for major media companies to merge -- which sounds good to me (and seems inline with Techdirt's coverage of recent media mergers).

    On the other hand, I'm inclined to share Rob Williams's skepticism at Sanders's proposal to tax online ads and use the proceeds "to fund nonprofit civic-minded media."

    (And a churlish aside: any proposal I'd make for improving online news sources would begin with "stop putting light-gray text on white backgrounds." Maybe someone can pass that along to Doc Searls.)

More comments from Thad >>