Forgot your password?

typodupeerror

Comment: Re:More support for a national ID (Score -1, Troll) 238

by blahplusplus (#43949657) Attached to: What Charles G. Koch Can Teach Us About Campaign Finance Data

"Really strange - the lefts HATRED of brothers promoting freedom with their own money."

It's really strange that you are so uninformed. Both parties are owned and could give less of a shit about you, the fact that you think the Koch brothers are 'promoting freedom' means you are seriously ignorant about politics and history.

Comment: Ethical consequences? (Score 3, Interesting) 393

by Black Sabbath (#43735713) Attached to: Why We Should Build a Supercomputer Replica of the Human Brain

Say this actually works. We create a brain and start down the long path of "teaching" it just like with new-born humans.
What happens when we detect that the brain is "experiencing pain" (we already know that pain has a detectable neurological basis right?)
What happens when we detect the brain is experiencing depression?
What are our responsibilities then? Is this thing a human, a lab-rat, or a machine?

Comment: Can't wait to see YouTube's attorneys fee motion (Score 2) 49

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#43492249) Attached to: YouTube Wins Against Viacom Again
When you win a copyright case you may be awarded your attorneys fees. I can't wait to see YouTube's attorneys fee motion. It's going to make my firm's bills seem like chicken feed.

But the defendant's lawyers have done a great job of beating back the Evil Empire, and in so doing have accomplished an important victory for the vitality of the internet.

Comment: Re:Handing over our Rights (Score 1) 231

Have you ever examined the history of why these things came into being? Thomas jefferson never lived in a highly specialized technocratic society, hence the many founders views whom you worship aren't even relevant in a modern economy.

The amount of lies and propaganda in your post is disturbing. You are operating off a false understanding of the world.

Comment: Re:That's a new one... (Score 1) 49

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#43489563) Attached to: YouTube Wins Against Viacom Again

Right, I had figured that was who it meant, but I'm not sure I understand how that makes them 'content' maximalists. Is it just a typo like someone else suggested and it should read 'copyright' maximalists instead? If that's not it, then it seems a bit ambiguous. I want as much content as possible to be out there, wouldn't that make me a 'content' maximalist too?

Actually, you're 100% right. I think I was trying to decide between the phrase "content cartel" and "copyright maximalists", so my aging brain settled on "content maximalists". Would you change that to "copyright maximalists" for me, please :)

Comment: Re:That's a new one... (Score 1) 49

by NewYorkCountryLawyer (#43489139) Attached to: YouTube Wins Against Viacom Again

Content maximalists? In context it's obviously supposed to refer to Viacom et al, but I'm not sure what that means. They want maximum content? Doesn't quite sound right.

It means the big old school content "gatekeeper" companies, and their trade groups like the MPAA, RIAA, ASCAP, etc., whose economic power is being eroded by digitalization and the internet, and who are fighting back by taking extremist positions in defense of their copyright ownership.

Comment: Re:Handing over our Rights (Score 2) 231

"This should not be rocket surgery for a bunch of card-carrying Slashdot nerds and geeks, unless they've sold their geek cards to emotional rather than logical identity politics and class warfare, and abandoned logic and intellectual honesty"

Anyone who DOESN'T believe in class warefare HAS lost their logic and intellectual honesty. My god, you are one of the historically illiterate people here. People had to fight for social security and the eight hour work day. It wasn't just handed to them by the glorious free market gods you worship.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eight-hour_day

Not to mention the pro-active monitoring and co-opting of political dissent.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

+ - YouTube wins again 3

Submitted by NewYorkCountryLawyer
NewYorkCountryLawyer writes "Once again YouTube has defeated Viacom and other members of the content cartel; once again the Court has held that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act actually does mean what it says. YouTube had won the case earlier, at the district court level, but the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit, although ruling in YouTube's favor on all of the general principles at stake, felt that there were several factual issues involving some of the videos and remanded to the lower court for a cleanup of those loose ends. Now, the lower court — Judge Louis L. Stanton to be exact — has resolved all of the remaining issues in YouTube's favor, in a 24-page opinion. Among other things Judge Stanton concluded that YouTube had not had knowledge or awareness of any specific infringement, been 'willfully blind' to any specific infringement, induced its users to commit copyright infringement, interacted with its users to a point where it might be said to have participated in their infringements, or manually selected or delivered videos to its syndication partners. Nevertheless, 5 will get you 10 that the content maximalists will appeal once again."

It is clear that the individual who persecutes a man, his brother, because he is not of the same opinion, is a monster. - Voltaire

Working...