Comment Re: A Surprising Result From This Crew (Score 1) 91
Which corporation though? They are corporate friendly, but in this particular case they chose the ISP instead of the record companies.
Which corporation though? They are corporate friendly, but in this particular case they chose the ISP instead of the record companies.
This was always going to end this way. Sorry Ofcom but 4chan is 100% in the right here. Your authority extends only to requesting it be blocked in your country. Nothing more.
This isn't a multinational company and it is not in any way subject to any laws other than US law.
The US should think and act the same way: activities, companies and individuals outside the borders of the US are not subject to US laws. America is not the world's police force, as much as it likes to think it is. Mind your own business, and the rest of the world should do the same.
Allow me to posit the following: we could very well be minding our own business but still strongly influence the rest of the world. For example, if a company wishes to do business in America -- the world's largest and most lucrative commercial market -- they must comply with US laws. This is no different than any other country. You may not like it, but that's how commercial business works, and it'd be no different if someone like North Korea had the market everyone wanted. You'd just be complaining about a different country.
Don't like it? Don't do business in the US and you're free to do whatever you want. You'll be excluding yourself from probably 70% of the available market, but you're free to make that choice.
Don't forget, your argument can be turned around quite easily: you could mind your own business and stop trying to tell the US how to do business according to your wants/needs. Funny how that works.
they are no longer in the UK and UK laws no longer apply.
You're blissfully unaware of how laws work.
There are certain crimes that can be prosecuted and punished in the UK even if they were committed in Thailand or Antarctica. It is sufficient that they can get to you somehow, for example via an Interpol arrest request or an extradition order or by freezing your assets, etc.
Don't trust me, look it up, I'm sure chatgpt can fill you in.
You're blissfully unaware of how national sovereignty works.
Good luck getting the US to accommodate an Interpol extradition request for 4chan and its personnel. There's no reason the US would agree to it since 4chan has violated no US law. So long as 4chan operates in the US exclusively and violates no US laws, they are effectively beyond the reach of the UK government. They could presumably nab some 4chan executive if they ever visited the UK, but all one has to do to avoid that is just not visit the UK.
This is how international legal disputes have been handled since the dawn of international legal disputes. Don't trust me, look it up, I'm sure chatgpt can fill you in.
It's about time they admitted to something that was obvious to almost everyone: nuclear power is the only effective path to carbon-free base load power generation. Wind and solar make good intermittent sources, but base load has to be utterly reliable regardless of whether the wind is blowing or the sun is shining. That's nuclear.
Getting rid of the nukes was a knee-jerk reaction, not a smart technological decision. The pivot to depending on oil and gas from a potential hostile neighbor just added to the madness.
He spent 15 years building an audience of more than 38 million subscribers on YouTube. That's as sucked in as you can get to the system. He is very much a large part of the system you think he should be raging against.
He financed, produced, starred in, and distributed the film completely independent from the "Hollywood System". For God's sake, how much less "sucked in" can a person be and still have the means to do it at all???
Give the man some credit.
Yes, I saw crisp text on my 1024x768 LCD display a quarter century ago. But you missed the next part of the sentence, "even at small sizes". As text gets smaller you reach a point where it is no longer clear. On an 8k display even the smallest sizes are pin sharp. They are a bit fuzzy on 4k (as I use at work) and would be headache-inducing mush if you tried to show such tiny text on a 1920x1080 display.
Back in the day there were hand-created bitmap fonts for crisp display at small sizes. Nowadays, for better or worse almost every application uses outline fonts, which look a bit jaggy if rendered without anti-aliasing ("font smoothing") and a bit fuzzy with it. Only on a very high DPI display is this completely unnoticeable. My laptop is 4k and I am very happy with it, but to make best use of a 32 inch screen a higher pixel density is better.
I'm posting this from my home PC with Dell's 8k monitor. It's nice to see completely crisp text, even at small sizes, and certainly a noticeable quality improvement from 4k. But that's because I am sitting a few inches away. I recently bought a new television, and while I was tempted to pick up a cheap used 8k model, in practice it would make no difference when viewing it from the sofa.
Even Dell seems to have retreated from 8k, however. Their newer top-end monitor has a roughly 6k horizontal resolution.
Wouldn't it be funny if all of these companies that are trying to out AI each other all go bankrupt in the arms race.
I mean, let's just come up with a hypothetical example. Let's say that baby formula manufacturers realize that the specific tests used by the regulator to check for protein can be fooled by melamine and so they use melamine as an ingredient to save money while fooling the regulator. Consequently hundreds of thousands of babies get sick and tens of thousands are hospitalized with some dying, and that's just the ones that are known about. Should the regulators be the only ones that get in trouble while the executives who made the decisions buy themselves some private islands? I mean, A. that's not a hypothetical example and, B. I just do not understand what you are trying to argue here. Maybe it's my fault, but it just seems incomprehensible to me given the actual, real-world history of corporate behavior when it comes to food and drug safety.
I presume you're referring to the 2008 Chinese Milk Scandal? I'll point out this was something perpetrated by the Chinese industry, not American. It was knowingly covered up with the complicity of the Chinese government to prevent it from embarrassing the ongoing Olympics. Only when the scandal became impossible to cover up did the CCP take any action.
As of December 2025, San Francisco Mayor Daniel Lurie and former Mayor London Breed have both expressed praise for China and the relationship between San Francisco and Chinese cities.
According to SFMTA, there is no need for a site like Walz's.
So they are fine keeping it up right? Acting so fast to shut it down suggests there is in fact a need for it.
All Finagle Laws may be bypassed by learning the simple art of doing without thinking.