TKnarr 's Techdirt Comments

Latest Comments (871)

• On the post: The Tyrant In The White House

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 06 Oct, 2025 @ 05:33pm

  I call bullshit on this. What we see today is exactly fascism, and it's no mistake to call it that. Whether other political leanings are also open to abuse... is utterly irrelevant to that. As for your definition of "liberal", I think the fact that you outright claim that conservatives are liberal demonstrates you have a very, very strange definition of "liberal". At least as strange as the National Socialist German Worker's Party had for "socialist".

• On the post: A Memo To Corporate America: How To Stop Being Cartoon Villains

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 01 Oct, 2025 @ 05:34pm

  And look where modern corporate America is getting us. Look at EA, a major games company with a significant portfolio and long-term revenue potential now facing being dismantled and sold for scrap in the name of "shareholder value". Look at Target, where trying to chase "shareholder value" has resulted in the company being more valuable being sold for scrap than as a going concern. And they're still facing the possibility of a litigious shareholder dragging them through the courts arguing that the value of a company still in business is greater than the bargain-basement prices gotten by breaking them up and selling the pieces for scrap and that that constitutes violation of the fiduciary duty of the executives to maximize shareholder value.

• On the post: DOGE’s “Efficiency” Theater Comes Full Circle: Trump Admin Scrambles To Rehire The Very Workers Musk Fired To “Save Money”

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 01 Oct, 2025 @ 05:22pm

  I wouldn't come back to work as an employee. The only way I'd consider going back to the job was, to borrow from a friend, "Here's a list of my consulting rates. Oh, and that'll be cash up front paid into an escrow account at a bank of my choosing, no work to be done until the balance in the escrow account will cover it.".

• On the post: Secret Service Dubiously Claims, Without Evidence, To Have Uncovered ‘Hidden Telecom Network’ That Could Have Crippled NYC, UN

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 25 Sep, 2025 @ 09:00am

  I agree it's probably a garden-variety scam operation. A telecomm DoS or something wouldn't require that many unique cel-phone numbers. The scam texts and calls I get, OTOH, do require large volumes of burner numbers to work. Maybe a spam-posting mill originating all the social-media spam and AI slop we see every day. But not an attack on the UN.

• On the post: Anthropic’s AI Lawsuit Settlement May Not Go Through, But It Exposes A Truth About Copyright

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2025 @ 01:46pm

  Tech companies like Microsoft, Oracle, Blizzard and so on. The ones who need copyright to back up their claim that even if you bought their software you had to make a copy of it onto your hard drive to install it and you hadn't bought a license to do _that, and the only way to get that license was to agree to their EULA first (which you never saw until you tried to install the software).

• On the post: Anthropic’s AI Lawsuit Settlement May Not Go Through, But It Exposes A Truth About Copyright

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 24 Sep, 2025 @ 01:44pm

  Possible, but they could make the case that it was a cache the same as your browser uses to store copies of (copyrighted) web pages so it doesn't have to fetch them from the server every time you view them. Just like that browser cache the shadow library wasn't distributed to anyone else, and caching like that was one of the things the DMCA's provisions were supposed to protect.

• On the post: Anthropic’s AI Lawsuit Settlement May Not Go Through, But It Exposes A Truth About Copyright

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 23 Sep, 2025 @ 10:29pm

  One of the biggest obstacles to this settlement will, I think, be the limited scope of the authors who qualify as class members. Among other things they have to have registered the copyright (or have had it registered by their publisher) before the class action was filed. A huge number of authors didn't have copyrights registered because you only need that done before you sue over them. Most publishers don't bother registering until that point. All the authors who fall into that won't be covered by the settlement and can sue Anthropic on their own or as another class. Alsup's already commented on this. If he thinks this will leave that much liability unsettled, he may decide to nix the settlement or expand the class to cover the majority of authors but keep the $3000/work figure (which'd increase the amount Anthropic would have to pay by a lot). Amusingly it's the tech companies that put Anthropic in this position. The DMCA explicitly made transient copies and copies necessary for software to work non-infringing. In their quest to get click-through EULAs and ToS enforceable, the tech companies gutted those provisions through court decisions. Absent that, Anthropic probably could have argued it was only liable for those works it's software actually regurgitated verbatim, not the entire database behind it.

• On the post: MAGA’s Big Miscalculation

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 22 Sep, 2025 @ 06:42pm

  I think their biggest miscalculation was believing they had a large majority who'd support them despite all election results to the contrary. Now everybody's being forced to sit up and pay attention to them, and that's never going to go well when you're only 15% of the voting population. Their only hope is that the Democrats make the same mistake and try to keep pushing "centrist" (read "moderate Republican") candidates despite all the indications pointing to the voters wanting positions to the left of center.

• On the post: Copyright Troll Backfires: Has To Pay Up To Get Out Of Its Lawsuit Of Lies

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 19 Sep, 2025 @ 08:19pm

  Save that now anyone "Rockefeller Photos" sues has a blueprint for how to fight them and win, and a blueprint for tying them to PFP and making things worse for them. I'd think any competent lawyer looking at that, and the fact that it's on record that PFP paid to get their suit dismissed, would be happy to take this on on contingency. Their only worry would be Rockefeller dismissing their own case with prejudice before the defense has a chance to respond.

• On the post: The Murder Of Charlie Kirk Didn’t Help Anyone

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2025 @ 01:48pm

  I categorically disagree with your position. The mob boss who tells his underlings "That guy, we'd be better off if he weren't around anymore.", he's as culpable for that guy's murder as the low-level mook who actually does the deed. When someone tells his followers that "Your body, my choice." is a valid opinion towards women, he's as culpable as the guys who put that opinion into practice. When his words inspire others to violence he is absolutely endorsing and encouraging violence and I'm going to call him what he is: violent. He is the actual source of the violence right along with the people he incites and he doesn't get a pass on it.

• On the post: The Murder Of Charlie Kirk Didn’t Help Anyone

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 11 Sep, 2025 @ 09:51am

  My beliefs about violence are driven by the idea that the use of violence curtails any chance of a situation being solved peacefully.

  This is where I think you show the basic problem with your position. The people who're engaging in, and exhorting others to engage in, violence DON'T AGREE WITH YOU about violence being the last resort. And as long as they don't agree with you, you're entirely right that there's no chance of resolving the situation peacefully. That leaves precious few options for resolving the situation, and not resolving the situation leaves us with the continuing violence. I personally prefer a more nuanced position that distinguishes between initiating violence against someone else vs. responding to violence initiated by someone else. The former I consider an absolute last resort, and one I don't think needs applied in this situation. The latter I consider to merit whatever response ends the threat of violence with the least danger to myself, the target of the violence and innocent bystanders.

• On the post: DC Circuit Makes Rookie Mistake In Actually Following Binding Precedent In A Case Involving Donald Trump Firing People

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 10 Sep, 2025 @ 09:34am

  Were I one of these judges I'd be noting at the end of my ruling that "I fully expect the Supreme Court to overturn this ruling. However, I am required by that same Court to follow binding precedent in making my rulings until such time as that Court issues a ruling changing binding precedent.".

• On the post: Why Powerful But Hard To Detect Backdoors Could Become A Routine Problem For Open Source Projects Because Of AI

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 06 Sep, 2025 @ 08:40am

  Yes, they use external software, but compromising that software is an attack on that software, not the proprietary software itself. The company almost certainly doesn't modify the external software, so push access to the company's repos won't let you introduce vulnerabilities in the external software. Creating a trojan-horse package and getting it used is certainly an attack, and we've seen plenty of those (see "supply-chain attack"), but it doesn't involve AI nor will AI make those attacks easier.

• On the post: Why Powerful But Hard To Detect Backdoors Could Become A Routine Problem For Open Source Projects Because Of AI

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 05 Sep, 2025 @ 08:47am

  It probably couldn't because those projects don't accept code from external sources in the first place and won't give anyone access who doesn't work for the company. Proprietary code's vulnerable to an even simpler attack: bogus employees. We've already seen cases of this. Don't bother with lengthy prep, just get your guy hired as a contract employee at the target. If they aren't given the necessary access immediately it won't take more than 6 months to a year to get it thanks to high churn and overwork.

• On the post: Judge Mehta’s Google Antitrust Remedies: Threading The Needle Between Overkill And Underkill

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 04 Sep, 2025 @ 03:45am

  Sorry, but I think his "remedies" aren't going to do anything useful. The problem with Google is that it's advertising business has control over both a) it's search engine and b) it's browser, AND that it's become so big that it's almost impossible for any alternative search engine or browser to gain traction without first having on the same order of magnitude as much revenue as Google's advertising business. I don't buy the "but Google's size is good for consumers" line, the lack of competition alone is bad for consumers regardless of any efficiencies of scale. I also don't buy the line that it's fine for Google to be as big as it is and have as much money to throw around as it does as long as it got there legally, the end results are just as bad for consumers regardless of how it got to that size. The only remedies that'd be effective are, IMO, to separate the search engine itself and the browser from the advertising business (which I include the search site in, since the advertising is what funds the search site). I can see a feasible way to do that for the search engine, just require that the search site pay for access to the search engine on the same terms offered to everyone else. I can't see any feasible way to do that for the browser that allows development to be funded without giving the advertising business so much control that the exercise is pointless. You'd have to set up a free-software non-profit to own the browser and fund it publicly (ie. through government grants set up to block government control) and have a way to mandate that browser's use for a segment of the market that web sites and other browsers simply couldn't afford to ignore.

• On the post: OpenAI’s Answer To ChatGPT-Related Suicide Lawsuit: Spy On Users, Report To Cops

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 02 Sep, 2025 @ 09:30pm

  They’re doing that because it’s the only thing they can do, at a cost they’ll accept. Their control over what the chatbot generates is very limited.

  Then perhaps they shouldn't be making that chatbot available to the public. We already address this situation with product liability law. It's one thing to make a chainsaw that, if used incorrectly and without regard to safety, can cut your leg off. It's another thing entirely to make a chainsaw that, regardless of safety precautions and even when you follow all the correct procedures for safe operation, will randomly jerk itself out of your hands and cut your legs off for you. The first we'll allow, and even shield the manufacturer from liability when the user ignores the clear safety procedures documented. The second will be ordered withdrawn from the market and the company fined for even offering it, assuming the company's not bankrupt after the lawsuits against it for a faulty product. Similar logic underlies our laws about practicing medicine or law without a license. We know that the people who need medical or legal help don't have the expertise to know or correctly follow the rules to avoid hurting themselves, so we require the people who provide those services be licensed after proving they know the rules and can act to prevent their clients from hurting themselves and we put people who provide those services without proper licenses out of business so they don't hurt their clients or allow their clients to hurt themselves. If these chatbots can't avoid harming people, perhaps they should be similarly put out of business.

• On the post: Trump Administration Approves New COVID Vaccines… For Barely Anyone At All

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 29 Aug, 2025 @ 01:37am

  Like so many of Trump's "victories", it really isn't much of a restriction. When I go to schedule a 2025-2026 COVID-19 shot at CVS, the list of conditions that qualify as "high risk" includes "BMI above 25", "physically inactive", and "current or former smoker". Anyone working in an office should fit the "physically inactive" category, and the BMI one covers a lot more than it should. Plus there's a generic "anything your doctor thinks would be high risk", which could be as simple as "uses public transit regularly".

• On the post: Trump Administration Approves New COVID Vaccines… For Barely Anyone At All

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 29 Aug, 2025 @ 01:25am

  Conditions for severe COVID-19

  When I go to my pharmacy website to schedule a COVID-19 2025-2026 vaccination, it gives this list for risk conditions:

  • Cancer
  • Chronic heart disease
  • Chronic lung disease including cystic fibrosis
  • Kidney disease
  • Diabetes
  • Dementia or a neurologic condition
  • Chronic liver disease
  • Blood disorders
  • Body mass index greater than 25
  • Past or current smoker
  • HIV or tuberculous infection
  • Weakened immune system
  • Pregnancy
  • Substance use disorders
  • Mental health conditions
  • Physically inactive
  • Solid organ or blood stem cell transplant
  • Any other conditions or situations that places you at higher risk of severe illness from COVID-19 (consult your pharmacist or medical provider if you need help)

  Any of those let me schedule a vaccination without a prescription. The BMI and physically-inactive (office worker) ones are probably the most broadly applicable. So, like so many of Trump's "victories", it sounds restrictive but really isn't so much.

• On the post: DHS Arrests Kilmar Abrego Garcia With Plans To Ship Him To Uganda, Because He Refused To Plead Guilty To Fake Human Trafficking Charges

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 25 Aug, 2025 @ 06:23pm

  I'm not sure they're trying to take it out on him so much as they're trying desperately to keep his case from ever being able to go to trial. When it does there's going to be a ruling on the merits that even the 5th Circuit and the Roberts Court are going to have difficulty disputing in writing, and they'll have to do it in writing instead of via the shadow docket. At that point a whole lot of chickens come home to roost for the DOJ and ICE. Now if the judge(s) are just willing to go "We're ordering DOJ/ICE to make him available for court appearances before they had any opportunity to move him, so if he isn't available we're justified in throwing the responsible agents/officers in jail for contempt of court on the spot.".

• On the post: The New CBS Already Promising Major, ‘Painful’ Layoffs

  

  TKnarr ( profile ), 19 Aug, 2025 @ 10:00am

  Qe do not want to be a company that has layoffs every quarter.

  But they're absolutely going to be a company that has layoffs every quarter anyway, because that's the only way they have left to grow profits the way the markets want them to.

Next >>