Now if I'm out doin' crimes, then obviously I'm bothered, but otherwise.... I just don't see a reason that I would care.
Have you noticed how the scope of actions counted as "crime" has been rapidly expanding? Just because you don't harm others or the environment does not mean you are in compliance with the arbitrary and capricious dictates of the law. One reason to put limits on the state's ability to use technology to enforce the law, is to ensure that at least some degree of social cooperation from the populace is necessary. When grossly unpopular & unjust laws (e.g. file sharing as a criminal offence) become just as enforceable as laws that almost everyone supports (e.g. murder is illegal), it's a safe bet that citizens will loose much or all of their autonomy.
I understand the desire for privacy, but it does worry me that so many people here seem to feel the need to "hide" from the police.
Most decent, hard-working, non-violent citizens whom I know are as afraid of the cops as they are of criminals. Most people realize that nothing good ever comes from interacting with the police. And this is in California, where our cops are well behaved by comparison to many other states.
What do you think would happen to that corporation if it came out they were tracking everybody like this? They'd be run out of business quite fast.
False. Acxiom for example collects incredibly detailed dossiers on every American citizen, ostensibly for "marketing" purposes. But you can bet your last dollar they have some big, fat pipes from their datacenter up to McLean & Ft. Meade.
So why don't consumers run this kind of company out of business? It's simple - these businesses make money from the purchasers of the dossiers, not from the citizens who are tracked against their will. There is basically no legal way, and certainly no way that is practical for an ordinary citizen, to avoid being tracked.
Many do, for instance US federal laws against rape and murder can be enforce irregardless of where the crime took place; you really have to read the law to know for sure.
Yet such laws, despite their unilateral declaration of universal jurisdiction, can only be enforced under certain circumstances: - The violation occurred on US territory - The violator was a US citizen, and can be extradited - The Washington regime can convince a foreign nation to hand over one of their citizens - Use of covert military force, probably in contravention of international and possibly of US law, to abduct or assassinate a foreign citizen outside US territory
I don't want your half-assed knock-off client talking to my servers.
What if I the consumer of your product like your server, but prefer to use some other guy's superior knock-off client? The purpose of a protocol patent is to restrict the freedom of users.
(Btw, this is entirely hypothetical - I have no I idea about or interest in what your software does.)
Really? Sure, it's a good idea for one not to smoke in a car where children are present. But do we really want this being a law, to be enforced by the violent coercive power of the state? Think about the kind of intrusive policing necessary to monitor & ensure compliance with such a law.
Patent trolls? I though i4i had a legitimate case here and have real products.
Depends on what you mean by "legitimate". If you're saying they had a legally valid case under the rules of the Amerikan injustice system, then yes. But legitimacy is a broader concept than validity. Their case is only legitimate if one believes the ownership of ideas is itself a legitimate practice. Many of us here consider ownership of ideas to be deeply immoral, even akin to slavery. So regardless the legalistic validity of i4i's case, it can't possibly be legitimate.
Slashdot Mirror
Now if I'm out doin' crimes, then obviously I'm bothered, but otherwise.... I just don't see a reason that I would care.
Have you noticed how the scope of actions counted as "crime" has been rapidly expanding? Just because you don't harm others or the environment does not mean you are in compliance with the arbitrary and capricious dictates of the law. One reason to put limits on the state's ability to use technology to enforce the law, is to ensure that at least some degree of social cooperation from the populace is necessary. When grossly unpopular & unjust laws (e.g. file sharing as a criminal offence) become just as enforceable as laws that almost everyone supports (e.g. murder is illegal), it's a safe bet that citizens will loose much or all of their autonomy.
I understand the desire for privacy, but it does worry me that so many people here seem to feel the need to "hide" from the police.
Most decent, hard-working, non-violent citizens whom I know are as afraid of the cops as they are of criminals. Most people realize that nothing good ever comes from interacting with the police. And this is in California, where our cops are well behaved by comparison to many other states.
Blasting camera sensors with IR is already feasible; it's used in Copyrighted Public Spaces.
I'd be fascinated to learn more about how this is already used in public spaces. Any good links you'd suggest?
the cops use the tracking to find and arrest them.
Dude, get real - that would require actual work. Police just don't do that kind of stuff, and if you think they do you're living in a fantasy land.
What do you think would happen to that corporation if it came out they were tracking everybody like this? They'd be run out of business quite fast.
False. Acxiom for example collects incredibly detailed dossiers on every American citizen, ostensibly for "marketing" purposes. But you can bet your last dollar they have some big, fat pipes from their datacenter up to McLean & Ft. Meade.
So why don't consumers run this kind of company out of business? It's simple - these businesses make money from the purchasers of the dossiers, not from the citizens who are tracked against their will. There is basically no legal way, and certainly no way that is practical for an ordinary citizen, to avoid being tracked.
I grow natural organic heirloom tomato TREES, they are 5 years old and each 20-feet tall and bare 50lbs of tomatoes 4 times per year
I would love to see such a plant... alas, google has no images of anything quite like that.
Otherwise your choices will soon be limited to "pay up, beyotch" ($150/mo *plus* your providers metered bandwidth plan) or go without.
Oh geeze no. I'd bet on about $30/mo for streaming only as the point at which their subscriber base would just collapse to almost nothing.
Ever wondered why Netflix's streaming catalog still generally sucks, as does their UI on most devices?
Netflix's UI on Roku is not bad. Certainly it's far superior to Hulu's (unspeakably bad) interface on the same device.
So sure, Star Trek came on Instant. But what else went away instead?
Babylon 5 :(
If I make my own cable, is that illegal?
Yes, and it probably qualifies you as a terrorist.
The geek is all for strict adherence to standards and branding until it becomes inconvenient.
The tool is all for strict adherence to legalisms even when it's clear they work to the harm of society.
It would be like saying a higher quality USB cable results in better print outs when connected to your printer.
Dude no, seriously, I bought this $125 USB cable recently - and let me tell you the printouts from my inkjet now look superb.
Many do, for instance US federal laws against rape and murder can be enforce irregardless of where the crime took place; you really have to read the law to know for sure.
Yet such laws, despite their unilateral declaration of universal jurisdiction, can only be enforced under certain circumstances:
- The violation occurred on US territory
- The violator was a US citizen, and can be extradited
- The Washington regime can convince a foreign nation to hand over one of their citizens
- Use of covert military force, probably in contravention of international and possibly of US law, to abduct or assassinate a foreign citizen outside US territory
Welcome to McFascism, please drive thru.
The detailed description is quite detailed, sufficient to enable one of skill in the art to make and use the claimed invention.
What the fuck are you smoking, and where can I get some of it?
If they've paid you, they're your customers. You may not want their patronage anymore, but that's a different matter.
I don't want your half-assed knock-off client talking to my servers.
What if I the consumer of your product like your server, but prefer to use some other guy's superior knock-off client? The purpose of a protocol patent is to restrict the freedom of users.
(Btw, this is entirely hypothetical - I have no I idea about or interest in what your software does.)
If Tim had called it "Berners-Lee Hypertext Transfer Protocol" then I'd remember his name, but I'd be annoyed having to type blhttp://
How about just "Berners-Lee Transfer Protocol"? With the acronym BLTp, a whole host of sandwich-related puns could ensue.
Stupid parents ruin every generation. Shall we criminalize stupidity? Imprisoning people is not the answer to every question.
Really? Sure, it's a good idea for one not to smoke in a car where children are present. But do we really want this being a law, to be enforced by the violent coercive power of the state? Think about the kind of intrusive policing necessary to monitor & ensure compliance with such a law.
this is such a brain dead obvious thing to do that the fact that it is patented and worth 300 million dollars is fucking ridiculous!
When it comes to monopolizing ideas, the most brain dead obvious ones are the most valuable, because everybody uses them.
Patent trolls? I though i4i had a legitimate case here and have real products.
Depends on what you mean by "legitimate". If you're saying they had a legally valid case under the rules of the Amerikan injustice system, then yes. But legitimacy is a broader concept than validity. Their case is only legitimate if one believes the ownership of ideas is itself a legitimate practice. Many of us here consider ownership of ideas to be deeply immoral, even akin to slavery. So regardless the legalistic validity of i4i's case, it can't possibly be legitimate.
Fascism for the win!
I still don't understand why I can't buy a 4:3 laptop these days. Everyone I talk to says he'd prefer one to the current wide-screen offering.
Amen. Also, I would love to see a cheap little netbook with a 4:3 screen.
The term "pirate" for an unauthorised copy predates copyright.
That sounds completely, 100% bogus. Please feel free to prove me wrong with a strong citation.