Uh, this problem (at least something that happens so soon after you try it) wouldn't happen on a moderated market, no reason to be hesitant to put legit apps on - and without apps, why even have a smartphone?
Because the company that pulled this stunt just demonstrated a significant ethical lapse. That's sufficient reason not to buy anything from them. Find a competitive product and support that vendor instead.
The pirated app appears to be created and released by the same company who makes the legitimate app. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it was a good thing to do.
Correct. And so far as I'm concerned, they just proved that they are no more deserving of my trust (or my money!) than is the author of any trojan. I understand that they're concerned about copyright infringement, but that doesn't excuse unethical behavior. No more than Sony's CD rootkit was justifiable.
I personally, will avoid Motorola no matter what phone they develop
I tend to agree. I feel about Motorola about the same way I feel about Sony... I don't trust them not to screw me over. I've had a couple of HTC Android phones so far, and while I did have to root them the process wasn't difficult (they couldn't certainly have made it harder!) and I've been able to run the third-party ROM of my choice. Contrast that to Motorola's stance that they won't allow anything but their provided Android version. Screw them.
Phone makers have been happy to sell ancient versions of Android and never delivering on upgrades. The/. crowd might care which version they're running, but most people don't seem to. Maybe they'll just stick with 2.3 (or 2.2 or even 2.1) + extra crap.
Only because they don't know better. I've put Cyanogenmod on a number of devices for friends and family, and they all immediately noticed the difference, and won't go back to the stock stuff. Hell, when Cyanogenmod RC2 came out, he had a 150,000 downloads the first night (he's on RC4 now, so I'm expecting the Final in a couple of weeks.) But even his nightly builds blow away the stock firmware in terms of overall stability and performance.
What most people need, is a phone that they can buy, and they can do stuff with. Most people want to tinker with and mod their phones as much as they want to tinker with and mod their cars, which is to say they don't want to tinker.
Yes, but you're entirely missing the point (one which Google gets, and demonstrated very clearly by releasing an open-source OS in the first place.) You're taking the Jobs approach that a phone's operating system is something that should never, ever, be under the user's control. Which is hysterical to me, because I guarantee you that if Microsoft or Apple or any other PC operating system vendor tried to impose that level of control upon you, you'd scream bloody murder and look elsewhere for your OS.
Android is an open source Linux distribution. Just like many, many other Linux distributions, but this one just happens to be designed to run on a cell phone. Are you saying that there should only be one officially-sanctioned Linux distro for personal computers, and that all the rest should be considered rogue? I think you can see the ridiculousness of that, and if you start to think of your smart phone as the personal computer that it is, you start to understand just how offensive this idea of preventing users from running the operating system of their choice really is.
So, yes, the average user has no interest in personally doing squat with the source code to his OS, but that doesn't mean that he may not want the results of other people's tinkering! For example, my G2 runs Cyanogenmod. I've been an avid user of Steve Kondik's work since it was first released, mainly because it was superior to the carrier's offerings and continues to be so to this very day. Have I ever looked at a line of Android source, or compiled it for myself? Of course not: but force me to go back to the stock firmware and I'll probably just go buy an iPhone. Just before I shoot myself in the head to put myself out of my misery.
Just like the PC OS market is dominated by the "easiest... most open" product, Microsoft Windows DOES NOT COMPUTE DOES NOT COMPUTE NOMAD WILL SELF DESTRUCT
Actually, Windows is perfectly open, in the context that we're discussing here. No, Windows is not open source, but in terms of the level of control the user has over the applications installed, and where they come from, Windows is as open as you can get. Nobody telling you what software you can or cannot use, nor are you forced to acquire that software from a single source. Unfortunately, Microsoft has chosen the Apple model for its latest Windows mobile effort, and that's too bad.
Really? I've been using Android phones for a few years now and have yet to find one I'm happy with. My requirements:
Hardware keyboard
Decent performance
Runs latest version of Android
Not full of bugs
I have a Desire Z at the moment, and it's a miserable piece of shit. Suggestions for a replacement are much appreciated.
I recommend the HTC Vision / T-Mobile G2 running Cyanogenmod 7.
Hardware keyboard.
Astonishing performance (partly CM7, partly the integrated CPU/GPU chip)
Runs CM7 (Gingerbread)
Cyanogen's stuff is solid. He didn't focus on glitter (like a number of other third-party Android ROMs) but on performance and stability. The thing just won't crash. Also, out of all the devices supported by the Cyanogenmod developers, Steve Kondik (the guy that started it all) maintains the G2 code. I can't live without it, and I'll not go back to the stock firmware unless I have no choice. You'll have to root the thing (which isn't difficult I discovered) but once you do, you'll be a fan. It's what Android always started out to be, and will never be so long as the carriers are in charge of the operating system.
Now, the native CPU speed of the G2 is 800 Mhz (although it performs like the 1 Ghz. older ARM in the Nexus One, and as I mentioned has an additional performance gain from the integrated CPU and video.) I had to overclock the stock firmware to 1 Ghz or more to get what I felt was good performance out of the carrier-supplied Android. Running Cyanogenmod 7 I can run it at the standard 800 Mhz, and it just flies. I have a couple of hundred apps on the phone, and I haven't yet found a compatibility issue with any of them. That's impressive in its own right.
I have some android apps that are low resource and very simple. Their interfaces are intuitive and polished. The problem is that many android apps are mostly functional, but lack any polish and the interfaces/documentation is abysmal. Putting that extra effort to make your software desirable makes a big difference in whether the average joe purchases the app. Apple and many of the App Store devs have realized that style sells as much as substance.
That's true, and is why any serious development organization will have user-interface designers and graphic artists numbered among their team members. GUI design is as much a specialty as any other aspect of software development. I have this to say to a lot of you devs out there: remember what Dirty Harry said? "A man's got to know his limitations." Most of you haven't the slightest idea of what makes an app smooth, polished, and a joy to use. That being the case... hire some people that do.
That said, there are some truly awesome Android apps, so it ain't the platform, boys and girls, it's the people factor. And given the size of the Android market, and the amount of money to be made, there's no question that we'll eventually see some maturity here as well. In a lot of ways Android and its app developers are still playing catchup, but Apple's lead won't last forever. There are lots of good development teams out there.
No it has to be because Sony is evil and therefore validating my reason not to pay for software!
Sony became evil after they slept with the Devil... that is, big media. They were my heros after the original Betamax decision was handed down decades ago. Now... huh. I don't have any Sony hardware in my house anymore, and probably never will.
Interestingly though, Nintendo owns the patent for emulation of games on mobile devices: Patent #6,672,963 [uspto.gov]
Which is, in itself, insane. Being able to patent an entire category of technological development (thereby effectively suppressing development of that technology for decades) is the primary failure of the U.S. patent system. Let Nintendo develop, demonstrate and patent their own emulator. Then sue people that infringe upon that particular implementation. The patent system does not serve its Constitutionally-mandated function when patent holders can hold a gun to the heads of anyone trying to develop products along similar lines. That's not what the system was supposed to accomplish.
Not that software patents should ever have been permitted in the first place. This is just adding insult to injury.
But then again, take a look at all the people who buy the locked down iPhones.... my optimism might be unwarranted in this case, unfortunately.
Probably not. Take Google Nav away from the millions of people (like me) who can't find their way out of the bathroom, and you'll find yourself facing torches and pitchforks.
Well, most Android phones (even, to an extent, newer Motorola models) can have new system images put on them.
Well, all I know is that if I can't get Cyanogenmod 7 on a particular device, I'm probably not going to buy that device. I've learned one thing: don't depend upon the carriers for system updates. They'll happily leave you hanging for months before rolling out a new OTA, and then... all you get is a hacked version of the stock firmware. Yeah, that's right... hacked, with necessary features removed, and garbage software added. And they have the audacity to complain about third-party ROMs like Cyanogenmod, that are faster, more reliable and more feature-rich.
Frankly, I consider my HTC Vision to be what it truly is: a portable computer that happens to make phone calls, not the other way 'round. As such, I don't accept that a carrier or a vendor has any legitimate right to limit my choice of operating system to what little they care to offer, any more than I would U-Verse telling me I have to run Windows on my desktop machines. As it happens, I run Linux there too. This is one case where I definitely vote with my dollars: so long as HTC doesn't get too Motorola-like in their lockdowns, they'll keep getting my business.
I'm also currently on T-Mobile, and yeah I'm thoroughly torqued about the impending AT&T buyout. I was speaking to someone last week whose sister works for T-Mobile: she was told to get ready to become an AT&T employee. Her office is already switching over. I'd like to believe that there's a real possibility that our regulators will block the deal as the anticompetitive, anticonsumer horsehockey that it really is. That AT&T is already taking over T-Mobile facilities tells me that the fix is in, the buyout is going to happen regardless of what the consumer wants, and us happy T-Mobile users are pretty well screwed.
I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Right now I'm tingling in anticipation of the frothing-mouthed Android apologists who can't wait to tear you apart. I love to watch them twitch and flop when someone slaps them with a dose of reality.
Ha. Thus speaks a true Apple apologist. Jobs is not God, Apple is not forever, nor is it perfect. And "frothing mouthed"? The only frothing I usually see is Apple fans who just can't STAND even the slightest criticism of their chosen supplier of shiny objects.
Hypocrite. Learn to handle differing opinions. It makes you more tolerable.
has written a Visual Basic application to track your IP.
Does anyone remember the episode where they were trying to clean up a securicam image and the tech muttered something about doing a "reverse algorithmic."
Proof is not necessary in a civil suit, and the IP -> computer link is probably enough for the court to authorize seizure and examination of the computer in question.
Quite probably true. So encrypt. And make sure your machine is always logged out if you're not using it. The last thing I heard from a Federal court ruling is that if your passwords are in your head, law enforcement cannot legitimately force them from you. If, however, you write them down, that's fair game. If they manage to crack your encryption on their own, that's okay too.
You *CAN* map an IP address to the person who has the account with the ISP
Not reliably, which is what we've been discussing at some length, and given the consequences of error it's simply not acceptable to use an ISP's logs as the sole evidence in a trial. It simply is not.
and I have no problem whatsoever with people being civilly responsible (not criminally) for any illegal activities that occur on their internet connection. If they can provide reasonable evidence that they aren't likely to be personally responsible, then insurance could cover most of the costs involved.
You'll change your tune quick if the RIAA decides to go after you. And frankly, I don't know what kind of insurance the average person would have that would cover legal costs that can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars or more over copyright infringement. My car insurance won't. My home insurance won't. My business insurance won't. What kind of insurance do you have against frivolous lawsuits by multimillion dollar law firms who can outspend you at every turn?
The Recording Industry Association of America has demonstrated, in some 30,000 copyright infringement lawsuits, that they simply do not care if they target the proper parties, or even if they have the legal right to sue for the supposedly infringing material! They don't care if the person has a computer, an Internet connection, or is even alive (yes, they've tried to sue dead people.) Your presumption is that the parties seeking this information are ethical, honest, and have any intention of playing fair, or obeying the law. They are not and do not, and given that fact, we need to be a little less cavalier about how we handle such privacy issues. Many lives have been destroyed so far, and with similar leech colonies eyeballing the same tactics, something should be done to make sure that these lawsuits are based upon fact, not conjured out of some sociopathic attorney's mind.
Furthermore, their usual tactic is to win a default judgment against in you in some venue far, far away from you. Then they come to you and say, "Well, see, we've already had our day in court (you didn't, ha ha, because we didn't even tell you that we were suing you, you stupid fool) and if you don't want us to come down on you like a ton of bricks, pay us several thousand dollars in juice money now so we'll go away. Oh, and we don't guarantee that we won't come after you later anyway, because, well, we're dicks."
It's comments like yours that convince me that big media is trolling Slashdot.
My fallacy detector just exploded. I *do* have many things to hide, but they are not illegal. I call that privacy.
Mine didn't explode but it chattered at me for a minute or so. That's the big problem with people who argue that we have nothing to fear from losing our privacy, and that only people who are criminals would be so concerned. We all have something to hide, for one reason or another, and law enforcement is often the least of our worries. But we don't want law enforcement pawing through our stuff and making it all public, or just going on fishing expeditions because they don't have any real work to do. The Founders understood that pretty clearly, I think.
ISPs are 'common carriers' and are immune to such lawsuits as a general rule.
This bit of misinformation keeps popping up now and then. ISPs (even those who are also telephone companies) are exempt from common carrier regulation (and all that goes with it) for the purposes of their data services. They got an exception to that, somehow, because they'd rather pay for the occasional lawsuit rather than have to labor under universal service and quality-of-service standards that are part of being a common carrier.
Slashdot Mirror
Uh, this problem (at least something that happens so soon after you try it) wouldn't happen on a moderated market, no reason to be hesitant to put legit apps on - and without apps, why even have a smartphone?
Because the company that pulled this stunt just demonstrated a significant ethical lapse. That's sufficient reason not to buy anything from them. Find a competitive product and support that vendor instead.
Who is this "they" that you speak of?
The pirated app appears to be created and released by the same company who makes the legitimate app. Of course, that doesn't necessarily mean it was a good thing to do.
Correct. And so far as I'm concerned, they just proved that they are no more deserving of my trust (or my money!) than is the author of any trojan. I understand that they're concerned about copyright infringement, but that doesn't excuse unethical behavior. No more than Sony's CD rootkit was justifiable.
I personally, will avoid Motorola no matter what phone they develop
I tend to agree. I feel about Motorola about the same way I feel about Sony ... I don't trust them not to screw me over. I've had a couple of HTC Android phones so far, and while I did have to root them the process wasn't difficult (they couldn't certainly have made it harder!) and I've been able to run the third-party ROM of my choice. Contrast that to Motorola's stance that they won't allow anything but their provided Android version. Screw them.
Phone makers have been happy to sell ancient versions of Android and never delivering on upgrades. The /. crowd might care which version they're running, but most people don't seem to. Maybe they'll just stick with 2.3 (or 2.2 or even 2.1) + extra crap.
Only because they don't know better. I've put Cyanogenmod on a number of devices for friends and family, and they all immediately noticed the difference, and won't go back to the stock stuff. Hell, when Cyanogenmod RC2 came out, he had a 150,000 downloads the first night (he's on RC4 now, so I'm expecting the Final in a couple of weeks.) But even his nightly builds blow away the stock firmware in terms of overall stability and performance.
From my point of view, Google is expecting developers to keep up the spirit of the dawn of open source and work for free.
One word: ads.
Keep dreaming!
What most people need, is a phone that they can buy, and they can do stuff with. Most people want to tinker with and mod their phones as much as they want to tinker with and mod their cars, which is to say they don't want to tinker.
Yes, but you're entirely missing the point (one which Google gets, and demonstrated very clearly by releasing an open-source OS in the first place.) You're taking the Jobs approach that a phone's operating system is something that should never, ever, be under the user's control. Which is hysterical to me, because I guarantee you that if Microsoft or Apple or any other PC operating system vendor tried to impose that level of control upon you, you'd scream bloody murder and look elsewhere for your OS.
Android is an open source Linux distribution. Just like many, many other Linux distributions, but this one just happens to be designed to run on a cell phone. Are you saying that there should only be one officially-sanctioned Linux distro for personal computers, and that all the rest should be considered rogue? I think you can see the ridiculousness of that, and if you start to think of your smart phone as the personal computer that it is, you start to understand just how offensive this idea of preventing users from running the operating system of their choice really is.
So, yes, the average user has no interest in personally doing squat with the source code to his OS, but that doesn't mean that he may not want the results of other people's tinkering! For example, my G2 runs Cyanogenmod. I've been an avid user of Steve Kondik's work since it was first released, mainly because it was superior to the carrier's offerings and continues to be so to this very day. Have I ever looked at a line of Android source, or compiled it for myself? Of course not: but force me to go back to the stock firmware and I'll probably just go buy an iPhone. Just before I shoot myself in the head to put myself out of my misery.
Just like the PC OS market is dominated by the "easiest ... most open" product, Microsoft Windows DOES NOT COMPUTE DOES NOT COMPUTE NOMAD WILL SELF DESTRUCT
Actually, Windows is perfectly open, in the context that we're discussing here. No, Windows is not open source, but in terms of the level of control the user has over the applications installed, and where they come from, Windows is as open as you can get. Nobody telling you what software you can or cannot use, nor are you forced to acquire that software from a single source. Unfortunately, Microsoft has chosen the Apple model for its latest Windows mobile effort, and that's too bad.
Really? I've been using Android phones for a few years now and have yet to find one I'm happy with. My requirements:
I have a Desire Z at the moment, and it's a miserable piece of shit. Suggestions for a replacement are much appreciated.
I recommend the HTC Vision / T-Mobile G2 running Cyanogenmod 7.
Hardware keyboard.
Astonishing performance (partly CM7, partly the integrated CPU/GPU chip)
Runs CM7 (Gingerbread)
Cyanogen's stuff is solid. He didn't focus on glitter (like a number of other third-party Android ROMs) but on performance and stability. The thing just won't crash. Also, out of all the devices supported by the Cyanogenmod developers, Steve Kondik (the guy that started it all) maintains the G2 code. I can't live without it, and I'll not go back to the stock firmware unless I have no choice. You'll have to root the thing (which isn't difficult I discovered) but once you do, you'll be a fan. It's what Android always started out to be, and will never be so long as the carriers are in charge of the operating system.
Now, the native CPU speed of the G2 is 800 Mhz (although it performs like the 1 Ghz. older ARM in the Nexus One, and as I mentioned has an additional performance gain from the integrated CPU and video.) I had to overclock the stock firmware to 1 Ghz or more to get what I felt was good performance out of the carrier-supplied Android. Running Cyanogenmod 7 I can run it at the standard 800 Mhz, and it just flies. I have a couple of hundred apps on the phone, and I haven't yet found a compatibility issue with any of them. That's impressive in its own right.
You can probably pick one up from Swappa.com.
Bullshit.
I have some android apps that are low resource and very simple. Their interfaces are intuitive and polished. The problem is that many android apps are mostly functional, but lack any polish and the interfaces/documentation is abysmal. Putting that extra effort to make your software desirable makes a big difference in whether the average joe purchases the app. Apple and many of the App Store devs have realized that style sells as much as substance.
That's true, and is why any serious development organization will have user-interface designers and graphic artists numbered among their team members. GUI design is as much a specialty as any other aspect of software development. I have this to say to a lot of you devs out there: remember what Dirty Harry said? "A man's got to know his limitations." Most of you haven't the slightest idea of what makes an app smooth, polished, and a joy to use. That being the case ... hire some people that do.
That said, there are some truly awesome Android apps, so it ain't the platform, boys and girls, it's the people factor. And given the size of the Android market, and the amount of money to be made, there's no question that we'll eventually see some maturity here as well. In a lot of ways Android and its app developers are still playing catchup, but Apple's lead won't last forever. There are lots of good development teams out there.
Here you go
Except that google actually has removed applications from people's phones before. Was even a story here on /. Feel free to look it up.
And I'd be willing to bet that Apple could too, if it wanted to. They just haven't showed those cards yet: but sooner or later they will.
No it has to be because Sony is evil and therefore validating my reason not to pay for software!
Sony became evil after they slept with the Devil ... that is, big media. They were my heros after the original Betamax decision was handed down decades ago. Now ... huh. I don't have any Sony hardware in my house anymore, and probably never will.
Interestingly though, Nintendo owns the patent for emulation of games on mobile devices: Patent #6,672,963 [uspto.gov]
Which is, in itself, insane. Being able to patent an entire category of technological development (thereby effectively suppressing development of that technology for decades) is the primary failure of the U.S. patent system. Let Nintendo develop, demonstrate and patent their own emulator. Then sue people that infringe upon that particular implementation. The patent system does not serve its Constitutionally-mandated function when patent holders can hold a gun to the heads of anyone trying to develop products along similar lines. That's not what the system was supposed to accomplish.
Not that software patents should ever have been permitted in the first place. This is just adding insult to injury.
Gun control is hitting your target. The real problem is that schools don't teach how to handle a firearm safely and effectively.
I'd be happy if they could teach the little bastards how to handle a car safely.
But then again, take a look at all the people who buy the locked down iPhones.... my optimism might be unwarranted in this case, unfortunately.
Probably not. Take Google Nav away from the millions of people (like me) who can't find their way out of the bathroom, and you'll find yourself facing torches and pitchforks.
Well, most Android phones (even, to an extent, newer Motorola models) can have new system images put on them.
Well, all I know is that if I can't get Cyanogenmod 7 on a particular device, I'm probably not going to buy that device. I've learned one thing: don't depend upon the carriers for system updates. They'll happily leave you hanging for months before rolling out a new OTA, and then ... all you get is a hacked version of the stock firmware. Yeah, that's right ... hacked, with necessary features removed, and garbage software added. And they have the audacity to complain about third-party ROMs like Cyanogenmod, that are faster, more reliable and more feature-rich.
Frankly, I consider my HTC Vision to be what it truly is: a portable computer that happens to make phone calls, not the other way 'round. As such, I don't accept that a carrier or a vendor has any legitimate right to limit my choice of operating system to what little they care to offer, any more than I would U-Verse telling me I have to run Windows on my desktop machines. As it happens, I run Linux there too. This is one case where I definitely vote with my dollars: so long as HTC doesn't get too Motorola-like in their lockdowns, they'll keep getting my business.
I'm also currently on T-Mobile, and yeah I'm thoroughly torqued about the impending AT&T buyout. I was speaking to someone last week whose sister works for T-Mobile: she was told to get ready to become an AT&T employee. Her office is already switching over. I'd like to believe that there's a real possibility that our regulators will block the deal as the anticompetitive, anticonsumer horsehockey that it really is. That AT&T is already taking over T-Mobile facilities tells me that the fix is in, the buyout is going to happen regardless of what the consumer wants, and us happy T-Mobile users are pretty well screwed.
Bastards.
in fact it might be good if they did more of that to prevent rouge apps
Yes, and in fact they might want to get rid of those mascara apps while their at it.
nice selective criteria there, iOS has greater market share than Android overall
Oh? Not according to Techcrunch. Nice lie there.
I thoroughly enjoyed your post. Right now I'm tingling in anticipation of the frothing-mouthed Android apologists who can't wait to tear you apart. I love to watch them twitch and flop when someone slaps them with a dose of reality.
Ha. Thus speaks a true Apple apologist. Jobs is not God, Apple is not forever, nor is it perfect. And "frothing mouthed"? The only frothing I usually see is Apple fans who just can't STAND even the slightest criticism of their chosen supplier of shiny objects.
Hypocrite. Learn to handle differing opinions. It makes you more tolerable.
has written a Visual Basic application to track your IP.
Does anyone remember the episode where they were trying to clean up a securicam image and the tech muttered something about doing a "reverse algorithmic."
Proof is not necessary in a civil suit, and the IP -> computer link is probably enough for the court to authorize seizure and examination of the computer in question.
Quite probably true. So encrypt. And make sure your machine is always logged out if you're not using it. The last thing I heard from a Federal court ruling is that if your passwords are in your head, law enforcement cannot legitimately force them from you. If, however, you write them down, that's fair game. If they manage to crack your encryption on their own, that's okay too.
You *CAN* map an IP address to the person who has the account with the ISP
Not reliably, which is what we've been discussing at some length, and given the consequences of error it's simply not acceptable to use an ISP's logs as the sole evidence in a trial. It simply is not.
and I have no problem whatsoever with people being civilly responsible (not criminally) for any illegal activities that occur on their internet connection. If they can provide reasonable evidence that they aren't likely to be personally responsible, then insurance could cover most of the costs involved.
You'll change your tune quick if the RIAA decides to go after you. And frankly, I don't know what kind of insurance the average person would have that would cover legal costs that can run into the hundreds of thousands of dollars or more over copyright infringement. My car insurance won't. My home insurance won't. My business insurance won't. What kind of insurance do you have against frivolous lawsuits by multimillion dollar law firms who can outspend you at every turn?
The Recording Industry Association of America has demonstrated, in some 30,000 copyright infringement lawsuits, that they simply do not care if they target the proper parties, or even if they have the legal right to sue for the supposedly infringing material! They don't care if the person has a computer, an Internet connection, or is even alive (yes, they've tried to sue dead people.) Your presumption is that the parties seeking this information are ethical, honest, and have any intention of playing fair, or obeying the law. They are not and do not, and given that fact, we need to be a little less cavalier about how we handle such privacy issues. Many lives have been destroyed so far, and with similar leech colonies eyeballing the same tactics, something should be done to make sure that these lawsuits are based upon fact, not conjured out of some sociopathic attorney's mind.
Furthermore, their usual tactic is to win a default judgment against in you in some venue far, far away from you. Then they come to you and say, "Well, see, we've already had our day in court (you didn't, ha ha, because we didn't even tell you that we were suing you, you stupid fool) and if you don't want us to come down on you like a ton of bricks, pay us several thousand dollars in juice money now so we'll go away. Oh, and we don't guarantee that we won't come after you later anyway, because, well, we're dicks."
It's comments like yours that convince me that big media is trolling Slashdot.
My fallacy detector just exploded. I *do* have many things to hide, but they are not illegal. I call that privacy.
Mine didn't explode but it chattered at me for a minute or so. That's the big problem with people who argue that we have nothing to fear from losing our privacy, and that only people who are criminals would be so concerned. We all have something to hide, for one reason or another, and law enforcement is often the least of our worries. But we don't want law enforcement pawing through our stuff and making it all public, or just going on fishing expeditions because they don't have any real work to do. The Founders understood that pretty clearly, I think.
ISPs are 'common carriers' and are immune to such lawsuits as a general rule.
This bit of misinformation keeps popping up now and then. ISPs (even those who are also telephone companies) are exempt from common carrier regulation (and all that goes with it) for the purposes of their data services. They got an exception to that, somehow, because they'd rather pay for the occasional lawsuit rather than have to labor under universal service and quality-of-service standards that are part of being a common carrier.
on my porch, and attacks, someone, no, that is not
Welcome back, Captain Kirk.