Are you one of those people that think you can just stand out in a crowd and demand to be heard and taken seriously and then get all butt hurt when you dont or when security comes and throws you out?
What in the world makes you think you have the right to come here and demand that Mike debate his views with you, in the comment section of a technology news site. Mike has obviously built a name for himself over the years, good bad or indifferent, he has earned his place on the internet and in the world of tech news, and for some reason you, Mr. Unknown heckler feel you have the right to come here, to Mikes venue, and stand in the crowd and challenge Mike on his position and his beliefs, with a mask on, hiding in the shadows and expect to be taken seriously?
If this were a physical venue, you'd get you ass beat by security and thrown out the door in a new york minute, and the crowd would be laughing their asses off and cheering as it happened. But unfortunately this is the internet, a place where nobodies can come along and think they have the right to challenge established folks, as John Oliver put it, A weirdly level playing field, but just because there is no security guards to beat your ass as they drag you from the building doesn't mean that you'll get taken seriously, so why dont you just stop?
If you want Mike to take you seriously, then why dont you go start your own Tech News site, one thats Pro IP and Anti-Piracy, and fight for your right to exist amongst the hundreds or thousands of established players already on the playing field, and once you've done that, and you've become a recognized and respected force in the tech news world, then you can come here and challenge Mike and maybe you'll get taken seriously, you might even win a chance to have your debate you so badly want.
In the mean time, why do you, (as Eddie once said) have a coke and a smile and shut the fuck up.
Obviously you've never had the tap water in Arizona... I'm sure in many places its quite fine to drink the tap water. Here in Arizona, at least in the greater Phoenix area, the tap water is horrid. So bad in fact that the city put out fliers on how to make the tap water taste better.
Last year, my great aunt visited from upstate New York, she went to drink a glass of water, she filled a glass from the tap, took one drink and dumped the glass out and said our water is terrible compared to what they get in New York.
They can say what they want about the safety of the water, but the plain and simple fact is, the water around here tastes horrible.
I am a big water drinker, I drink between 2 and 4 gallons a day depending on how much time I spend outside in the heat. Water is the only thing I drink, I dont drink soda, tea or coffee or anything else, except for the occasional Gatorade, but even thats rare.
I've been this way my entire life, its not a conscious decision I make, I just drink lots of water, though for the last 10 years or so, the decision to completely avoid soda and other sugary drinks has been by choice. But, I've always been a big water drinker, and I can tell you that tap water tastes really bad around here. If you ice it down, its tolerable but still tastes bad.
My view of the DoJ, law enforcement and government in general has become so extremely jaded in recent years, especially when compared to others around me. Recently i've been asking myself how much of this has to do with the fact that I read and get my news the likes of Techdirt, Ars Technica, The Register, Torrent Freak and others on a daily basis, websites that specialize in reporting on government fuckery, or is it just simply because the government has become so screwed up and out of control...
Its for reasons like this that DMCA abuse needs to be criminal. There needs to be a realistic and enforceable criminal penalty for blatantly abusing the DMCA. That would stop a whole lot of bullshit across the board
You do realize that when served with a warrant, the clinic doesn't have the luxury of saying hold on a second we're going to make you copies of the files that your warrant is allowing you to have.
Do you have any clue what might happen to the clinic staff if they tried to interfere with the search warrant. their only option was complete and total cooperation and assisting the officers in gathering the information, anything less would have landed them in hot water themselves.
And no establishment on the planet has the authority to punish them for complying with a search warrant, no matter how wrong the warrant was. There is now mechanism built in to the law for challenging a warrant prior to it being served.
Google+ team to: wallyb132 date: Tue, Jul 15, 2014 at 10:02 AM subject: Your Google+ Appeal mailed-by: esadmin.bounces.google.com signed-by: google.com
After reviewing your appeal, we have determined that your name does not comply with the Google+ Names Policy.
We want users to be able to find each other using the name they already use with their friends, family, and coworkers. For most people this is their legal name, or some variant of it, but we recognize that this isn't always the case, and we allow for other common names in Google+ --- specifically, those that represent an individual with an established online identity with a meaningful following. If you haven't already done so, you can provide us with additional information regarding an established identity by re-submitting an appeal that includes references to where you are known by this name either in online or offline settings.
Note that if you're trying to set up a page for a business, band, group, or other organization, please sign up with your own name and then create a Google+ Page. If you're trying to add an alternate name (such as a nickname, maiden name or name in another script), please sign up with your full name; you can add this alternate name (which will appear alongside your full name) once you've signed up.
You may re-appeal with additional information, if you have not already done so. If you're already using Google+, your current name will continue to be used.
Google may be claiming that they've dropped this policy, but I'm calling bullshit on that, just this morning, 7 hours before this story was posted on Techdirt, I tried to post a review of a car dealership on google+ using a pseudonym and google+ suspended my profile to investigate my "name change".
An update to the story release yesterday says that the judge allowed the teen to leave the state. If the teens guardian was smart, they would leave him out of state until he's 21. Juveniles cannot be extradited across a state line except in the case of murder, so moving him out of state keeps him out of the reach of the VA courts, unless of course they decide to charge him as an adult, but charging him as an adult creates a legal paradox, charging him as an adult for creating child pornography of himself, you cant protect his innocence as a child and persecute him as an adult for the same action...
Hopefully this will get stopped on appeal. But I doubt it...
If I was the kids lawyer i'd be appealing this whole case and going after the prosecutor for selective prosecution. Why is the boy charged and not the girl. As the story made clear, the boy only made his video in response to the sending him a nude photo of herself. That makes her just as culpable in both manufacturing and distributing child porn. Not that I want to see the girl charged, but that may well be an avenue to get this dismissed.
These laws are out of control. they need to be amended to state something to the effect of, if the pictures or video's were shared between 2 people in a consensual and legally permitted relationship, there is no crime. If other take the material distribute it, then they have are liable for their actions. But if the people involved didn't create the material for the purpose of distributing it, and did not distribute it, they shouldn't be charged.
This is just as bad as the 19 year old in North Carolina that was sent to federal prison for 18 months because he video recorded him and his 16 year old girlfriend having sex, the relationship was legal by NC law, and the girl consented to the video, he never distributed it, it was found on his phone during a different investigation. He should have never been charged.
These states are out of control. It seems like we have a bunch of fucking whack job Jack Thompson's as DA's
I used to have no opinion on these types of subjects until several years ago, in Phoenix AZ, we used to have a popular hiking spot in the center of Phoenix called Squaw Peak, and a freeway that ran along side if it called the Squaw Peak parkway. There was a fight over the name and the city relented and renamed it to "piestewa peak". Ok no big deal, then shortly after the name change, an 84 year old woman who used to go for walks in the morning, using street signs to navigate found herself lost due to the fact that she couldn't find the sign for the squaw peak parkway, she called 911 from her cell phone claiming she was lost, and subsequently wandered in to the desert, a search ensued, and when we found her body, she was about a half mile from the road she needed to follow to get home, she died of dehydration because someone threw a fit about the name of a mountain and a street name. At that point I became very jaded on the subject.
I was working as an EMT at the time and was part of the search team that was looking for this woman, and one of whom who found her body... I dont give a fuck what argument people put forward, its all bullshit...
I'm not racist in any way, but I think this is a fight the government needs to stay out of. I dont support the use of racist terms either, but I think the USPTO is way out of line here, I am 41 years old and as far as I can remember the Washington Redskins have used that name. For the USPTO to deny it now is wrong. I'm not saying that the team is right for using the name, I'm just saying that government is wrong for getting involved at any level. In my view, for lack of a better term the 'statute of limitations' for taking action on this by the government expired decades ago.
I wouldnt say he lost credibility over his response, because like the post above says, he is the host of a comedy show.
However, i think he did something powerful with his first piece, something that nobody else has been able to do, and that was to get the message about cable company fuckery out in a way the general public, who has no clue what it means or how it will effect us, could understand it, all jokes aside, he did one hell of a good job explaining the subject. And with that said, I do think he missed a great opportunity to engage Tom Wheeler in a way that no one else could have.
Obviously his piece got some attention, and for once, the American public as a whole is enlightened about and starting to become engaged in a subject that is extremely important to all of us, and for that alone John Oliver deserves immense respect.