That was about their opinion shows, not their news shows. That case was specifically about Tucker Carlson.
Those kinds of arguments weren't saving Fox from the Dominion lawsuit, though. If they seemed like to have worked, Fox wouldn't have settled for almost $800 million right before trial.
Hastert doesn't have a law named after him. There's the Hastert Rule, which is an informal rule that no bill should be brought before the House to vote on it unless it already has the support of the majority of the majority party.
Hastert was convicted of structuring withdrawals to avoid reporting requirements and making false statements. The charges themselves were not inherently about homosexuality, though it came about from him covering up his same-sex abuse of a minor, and the indictment didn't mention the sexual abuse, and his allocution under the plea deal didn't initially mention it. He did admit it under pressure from the judge, who seemed to start to lean against accepting his plea without him admitting to the molestation, for which he could not be charged because the statute of limitations had expired decades prior.
Hastert has never come out as gay. Most child molesters, even those who molest the same sex, never identify as homosexual.
So noted. The intent was to provide sufficient context (and reference for said context) since enough time has passed that people might not know that the Tivo of today is not the same legal entity as the original Tivo.
We should be glad the original articles haven't bit-rotted into non-existence with how bad the web has gotten...
* Provide a service that provides a great benefit (commercial skip) to get people hooked
* Build userbase based on this benefit
* Sue other people based on "infringement" of this feature
* Sell itself to a pure patent troll (Rovi) which then renames itself Tivo
* After model of extorting other companies over patent troll portfolio is exhausted, start extorting the customer base
https://www.yahoo.com/entertai...
"Rovi has aggressively pursued licensing deals and litigation for its patent portfolio, dating back to predecessor company Gemstar-TV Guide International. Rovi says it has more than 5,000 issued or pending patents worldwide, with intellectual-property licensing representing 54% of its total 2015 revenue.
According to Rovi, its patents are licensed by eight of the top 10 U.S. TV service providers, including AT&T, Time Warner Cable and Charter Communications.
On Thursday, Rovi said in an SEC filing that reached a deal with Time Warner Cable â" which is in the process of being acquired by Charter â" to extend its existing interactive program guide and patent licensing agreement. The pact, which was set to expire March 31, has been extended through Dec. 31, 2016.
Last year, Rovi suffered a rare legal defeat against Netflix, after a U.S. federal judge ruled that the five Rovi-owned patents at issue in Rovi's lawsuit against the streaming-video company were invalid.
Rovi said it has not changed its financial estimates for 2016, which anticipated possible litigation with Comcast.
Separately, Rovi has reportedly been in talks to acquire DVR maker TiVo, which also has a sizable patent portfolio and won $1.6 billion to date from intellectual-property litigation."
https://www.yahoo.com/entertai...
"t's time to say goodbye, sort of, to the company whose pioneering DVR introduced consumers to time shifting and ad skipping. Some 17 years after it went public, TiVo just became a part of Rovi with the closing of a $1.1 billion cash and stock acquisition deal they made in May â" but with the buyer now adopting the TiVo name."
Number 7 according to Car & Driver, which I think is much more trustworthy than whatever "Wealthy Driver" is. The Car & Driver list is also applies to 2025 rather than 2023.
We (the residents of California) believe you, but the politicians/lobbyists don't.
Witness the real time collapse of our film industry.
The continuing damage from AB 5.
(see:
Trucking and Shipping Latest Victims of Californiaâ(TM)s âoeCruelest Law,â AB 5
https://www.pacificresearch.or... )
The 3d printer regulation bill (although we're just the latest state proposing this)
And the billionaire tax proposition.
The irony is if/when California does truly start running into difficult problems (all it takes is another financial downturn and our tax receipts will fall short), those same politicians/lobbyists will probably desert like fleas and migrate to adjoining states.
Can we just vote the bastards out? Please? It would also help if we could permanently attach scarlet letters that would essentially make them un-electable in the future.
It's not a remotely level playing field. One soldier who took part in the Venezuela raid basically had orders in hand when he placed multiple bets on the timing of the raid, netting a ton of money. There have been many other examples of inside information being used to stack the odds.
Unless you're a C-level employee, specifically working in M&A, or maybe as the lead on a truly revolutionary new product (no, your company's Facebook wannabe or thinly disguised open source ripoff ain't it) - You have no insider information to trade on. Sincere belief that your employer's cool new toys are going to change the world ain't it - every company has cool new toys in the pipeline, and most of them are going to flop or at best be just another branded widget.
This is absolutely not true. There are plenty of people in the financial side of a business that have information that is material but non-public, and trading based on that knowledge is illegal, including sudden cuts in spending, audit results prior to publication, and more. HR will be aware of major layoffs. Facilities might be aware of impending site closures before they're announced. All these things can be used for insider trading.
Lower-level people aren't usually pursued because they're small enough to fly under the radar. But that doesn't mean it's not illegal, and it doesn't mean it never happens.
Now that all this information is valuable (to AI bot scrapers), it's all being gatekept from humans who refuse to log in and participate in generating more valuable content for AI bot scrapers.
It's basically Farmville (but for scrapeable content), but restricted to the existing domesticated population of users. If you refuse to have a collar put on you, you no longer are allowed to access an echo copy of information that used to be on the open web before SEO garbage displaced it all.
Surfing with javascript turned off to help defend against drive-by 0-days? Half a dozen anti-bot systems either block or temp ban you. Use the wrong IP address, and reddit prevents access.
You could say this is a natural evolution of order in a capitalist society, as explained by Cory Doctorow's views on enshittification. However, I would argue this goes back even further to RMS' views on open vs closed software. Essentially, when no money is at stake, people are willing to share. When money is at stake, people start putting the things people were sharing behind closed doors and charging for entry.
If you extend the open source metaphor, being able to fork your posts theoretically allows individuals (and by extension a community) to transcend greed and censorship. Consider how much historical content (both virtual and IRL) has become cancellable in the last 4 presidential administrations, depending on which side of the current wave of bandwagoning you stand on. Even before that, how much content was rejected or "rewritten" on spaces like Wikipedia to satisfy the personal views of editors who staked out and camped specific areas on Wikipedia. Mind you, this was before Wikipedia became a force multiplier for influencing, which led to attacks by astroturfers and state actors.
Which then leads me to the question... what forkable, censorship resistant alternatives to reddit exist? I don't want to have a brand just to have my own legion of supporters to defend and reinstate me, or rely on glacial bureaucracy mandated by law if I get deplatformed just for having a conversation just because some AI bot had a bad day.
They already have a planned rotation. There will be two crews, rotating every four hours. This isn't unlike existing long-haul flights, except that instead of the crews rotating at the same time, they will be on two-hour offsets. One pilot will stay for the first four hours, the other for the first two hours. A replacement will swap in at two hours and stay through the sixth hour, and then the other will swap at four hours and stay through the eighth hour, and so on. Qantas said that this will apply to all flights of 20 hours or more.
While what you say may be true for state and local law enforcement, it is not true for federal law enforcement.
https://www.mololamken.com/kno...
"Under Section 1001 of title 18 of the United States Code, it is a federal crime to knowingly and willfully make a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the United States."
Actual text of the code:
https://uscode.house.gov/view....
"Â1001. Statements or entries generally
(a) Except as otherwise provided in this section, whoever, in any matter within the jurisdiction of the executive, legislative, or judicial branch of the Government of the United States, knowingly and willfully-
(1) falsifies, conceals, or covers up by any trick, scheme, or device a material fact;
(2) makes any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or representation; or
(3) makes or uses any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement or entry;
shall be fined under this title, imprisoned not more than 5 years or, if the offense involves international or domestic terrorism (as defined in section 2331), imprisoned not more than 8 years, or both. If the matter relates to an offense under chapter 109A, 109B, 110, or 117, or section 1591, then the term of imprisonment imposed under this section shall be not more than 8 years."
This is the statute under which Martha Stewart was sentenced to federal prison.
https://www.nyccriminalattorne...
"The interview isn't about solving the crime they're investigating. It's about creating a new one. When federal agents can't prove the underlying offense, they charge you with lying about it. Martha Stewart wasn't convicted of insider trading - she was convicted of lying to investigators about insider trading she was never found guilty of. The crime she went to prison for was created in the interview room. This is the federal playbook: investigate one thing, charge another. The conversation itself becomes the crime.
18 USC 1001 makes it a federal felony to make false statements to government agents. Five years in federal prison. $250,000 in fines. No oath required. You don't have to be in a formal interview room. You don't have to sign anything. A casual conversation on your front porch counts. Any federal matter, any federal agent, anywhere. And here's what nobody tells you: the agents asking questions usually already know the answers. They're not asking to learn what happened. They're testing whether you'll tell the truth."
I am also not a lawyer, so your mileage may vary.
Most comms software is better handled by a service. Email, chat, phone, etc. Let someone else deal with the problems of maintaining it. Almost everything else is worth discussing.
Thanks for the heads up.
Have you tried setting up something like a whitelist (see below)? I feel like that would make my life a lot better - just having a process that filters out the obvious SEO sites so that I don't have to do it.
Two words:
Parallel construction.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
"An example from one official about how parallel construction tips work is being told by Special Operations Division that: "Be at a certain truck stop at a certain time and look for a certain vehicle." DEA would alert state troopers and they may wait for that certain vehicle and use drug searching dogs to identify illegal drug-related activity, giving the appearance the search was conducted randomly.[4] "
This example also would be a form of evidence laundering. By the time the case is presented to courts, the fact that this all resulted from a warrantless search would be nowhere to be found.
No line available at 300 baud.
