Slashdot Mirror
EFF Has Outlived Its Usefulness?
An anonymous reader writes "An inflammatory article runs today on The Register, with the title EFF Volunteers to Lose Sony Rootkit Suit. The article argues that the EFF's track record in court is detrimental to everyone with an interest in digital and privacy rights." From the article: "This is a very good cause. Sony installed stealth spyware on many thousands of Windows computers (although calling it a rootkit is an exaggeration), and it's crucial that the company get its bottom spanked quite painfully as a deterrent to its sister cartels in the entertainment racket. This is, in fact, such an important matter that the worst possible development would be to find the EFF arguing the case. That's because EFF will do what it always does: lose, and set a legal precedent beneficial to the entertainment pigopolists. By the time these pale vegetarians get finished, spreading musical malware will be considered a spiritual work of mercy." What do you think? Isn't it better to fight the good fight?
But then I noticed it was in The Register! Haw! You guys got me good!
Whence? Hence. Whither? Thither.
I have it on good authority that EFF co-founder John Perry Barlow hunts elk with a obsidian spear, and eats the livers of his prey while still warm and dripping in blood.
Cory Doctorow is said to stalk, kill, and eat emus during his frequent, clandestine trips to Australia.
The only vegetables served in the cafeterias of the EFF Tower -- formerly the Transamerica Pyramid -- are potatoes and a bit of parsely, and only to accompany great the rare steaks favored by the employees.
"Pale vegetarians?" Fah!
Athletic Scholarships to universities make as much sense as academic scholarships to sports teams.
Meh. That job has higher turnover (and is only a little bit safer) than being the drummer for Spinal Tap.
-- This and all my posts are in the public domain. I am a lawyer. I am not your lawyer, and this is not legal advice.
I dunno, mate, I thought it was pretty funny, and I'm a pale vegetarian myself.
Well, actually, not so pale. Arizona sun and all, eh?
The trouble with many brits is that while they understand the basic concept of traditional dry british humor, they almost always do it badly. They mistake deadpan delivery of random combinations of weak sarcasm and patent absurdity for wit. They then claim the audience is too low-brow to catch the subtlety of the humor, when in reality it's just not particularly funny.
The thing is, it's terribly hard to transmit subtle irony in writing. For example, I'm torn in trying to decide wheter you are rationally dissecting the flaws in British humour or you are deadpanly delivering random combinations of weak sarcasm and patent absurdity.
I guess that if you reply and claim that I'm too lowbrow to catch the subtlety of your humor, we'll know.