Actually, they already have very specific rules for captioning Internet streaming content that Netflix and all other streaming companies follow (the misunderstanding that Netflix "doesn't do captions" is totally wrong - the vasty majority of their content is captioned):

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/capt...

This lawsuit was trying to claim that those already extensive rules aren't enough and the ADA requires all content to be captioned. Luckily the courts didn't agree...

It's common for movies that are distributed in a country that generally doesn't speak the movie's language, of course. Though they are called subtitles in that case.

The actual FCC rule about whether captions are required for streaming depends on two things: when the content originally aired on TV and when the device displaying them was built/updated (so that devices that were built before the rules don't apply). It's actually pretty fair.

http://www.fcc.gov/guides/capt...

The lawsuit was basically an attempt by lawyers to apply the ADA (Americans With Disabilities Act) to Internet closed captions to argue that those reasonable FCC rules aren't enough, and they should "get money" from companies that are really trying as hard as they can to follow the actual rules...

Two words: Doran Martell.

There may be some stupid comments here, but the general discourse (as we are having now) is actually WAY above average for tech sites. And infinitely more intelligent than, say, the "CopBlock" Facebook page of which the comments are about 95% either images/memes of cops getting beat up or various statements related to killing cops.

And while I agree there is probably almost zero reason for a SWAT team going to a random anonymous tip, they are certainly needed for raiding known gang or drug operations. Basically, use appropriate force - when you think the criminals have automatic weapons, go in with automatic weapons. When the tip is anonymous and against a 22 year old with no criminal record, maybe a bit of discretion is in order.

Basically, the police don't seem to have any actual policies or playbooks for various situations (or if they do they ignore them), and instead are following the "let's use everything we have" strategy to way too many situations...

That's ok, at long as the 8th got the joke ;)

To include the somewhat overused quote from Ben Franklin: "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

Problem is, (to paraphrase) people prefer security over freedom, and so are giving up the latter left and right these days. The problem is, honestly, for the vast majority they will have (somewhat) increased security with no noticeable loss of freedoms. People only realized how bad things have become if they are one of those small minority whose rights are violated, wrongly prosecuted, or killed.

If you have ever actually read posts of the Facebook followers of those sites, it's basically a bunch of morons (including many gamers) posting various anti-police rants and meme photos about killing cops.

The sites themselves do at least get valuable information and videos published about clear examples of police overreach and brutality - but the majority of commenters on these sites are the worst kind of trolls not helping reform anything, just promoting more violence (luckily, of course, they are just a bunch of dipshits hiding behind keyboards instead of actually acting on their impotent threats).

Just give them a lifetime ban them from using computers along with house arrest. That would be a fate worse than death - living in their parents' basement with nothing to do.

It's not that flawed.

If the police HAD ended up killing someone over the incident it's very possible the person calling in the fake threat could be tried for murder, so if the police didn't end up killing anyone it could still be attempted murder. It's all about intent.

If there was no proof of malice or intent to have the person killed but he was, it would likely be manslaughter - and "attempted manslaughter" is pretty rare since if you didn't mean for someone to be killed and they weren't, it's probably not applicable.

Why would you need a proof of concept for something that is almost completely useless? It's not like they are going to now put the effort into making it a "real product". As far as "hacks" go, it's pretty hokey.

Except no, they just put a fairly lame hardcoded demo in ROM. This is such a non story...

Yes, it was more or less a hoax. It was just a hardcoded few pages of static data and a small chunk of one "video" embedded in the ROM.

Shouldn't it be called the Google Ames Research Center?