LawTalkers
Page 1 of 334 1 231151101 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)
-   Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)
-   -   Loathing the Texas state legislature (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=870)

Replaced_Texan 01-17-2013 03:01 PM
Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
I didn't realize I was winning a K race when I posted.... :D

Title reflects my current frame of mind. It should remain so until the end of the legislative session sometime in May.

Will the thread last about as long?

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy 01-17-2013 03:27 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Replaced_Texan (Post 476543)
I didn't realize I was winning a K race when I posted.... :D

Title reflects my current frame of mind. It should remain so until the end of the legislative session sometime in May.

Will the thread last about as long?
Congratulations!

Anyways, on the computer fraud versus lab rat liberators thing, note the CFAA has three ways you bump from a misdemeanor to a felony: (1) if your act is for personal gain; (2) if your act violates another statute; or (3) if your act involves property worth more than $5K.

So there is a way in which being a misguided do-gooder gets you out from under, as long as you're dealing with petty stuff. But I've seen an argument that the same cyber-acts get the do-gooder different felonious counts (wire and computer fraud) w/o regarding to the three exceptions above, meaning with the (2) exception the (1) exception is rendered irrelevant for hackers.

Adder 01-17-2013 03:33 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
and to wrap up our little life of chatting to each, I merely note that I only said "litigation" because you made the dumbest argument you can make in litigation, "Some people think the law should change......"
Which might have been a useful comment if we were litigating, or discussing litigation strategy, instead of discussing what the law should be.

Hank Chinaski 01-17-2013 03:43 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 476547)
Which might have been a useful comment if we were litigating, or discussing litigation strategy, instead of discussing what the law should be.
weren't we talking about people who were doing criminal litigation? wasn't I saying I get why the prosectution could have started something and then you said "some people think the law should change so he shouldn't have started something?"

whatever. Fu!

sebastian_dangerfield 01-17-2013 04:09 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 476547)
1. Businesses aren't trying to control anyone. Marketers are only seeking data to sell you things.

2. Good luck maintaining your privacy in this age.

(My paraphrases of Adder's points from the previous thread.)
On 1, the only advantage you have over anyone in any interaction is what he doesn't know about you (or doesn't know about something important that you do know about). To collect data on someone is to develop a dossier, which allows you to understand him better, and to what end would anyone want to do that? To control what he does. To get him to buy something, or vote for something, or scare him into not saying or doing something.

You give a person, or an organization, access to enough info to draw a rough caricature of your personality and you are forever weakened.

Re 2, the only digital places I'm forthcoming with details of what I'm thinking or doing, in any regard, are ones in which you don't know me by name. To put your life on FB, or anything like it, is madness. The upside? Insipid content. The downside? Your info in the hands of the worst humans alive.

Adder 01-17-2013 04:36 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 476549)
weren't we talking about people who were doing criminal litigation? wasn't I saying I get why the prosectution could have started something and then you said "some people think the law should change so he shouldn't have started something?"

whatever. Fu!
Let's review.

I said, among other things:
Quote:
Anyway, I've not followed the case that closely, and I don't intend to. A young man who seems to have been well liked and well respected has died. That's tragic. That's all I really need to know.
You said, among other things:
Quote:
And I don't see why his intention to give it away after means anything. If I steal your car to give to a poor person that makes a difference? I see nothing wrong with this being a crime. More and more value for organizations is intangible. How else do we prevent theft?
And I said:
Quote:
There should be a very big difference between stealing your car, which prohibits your enjoyment of its possession and use, and stealing a copy of your costlessly-reproduced electronic content. The two situations really aren't at all comparable.
So, I responded to your simple analogy, which you used to justify your agreement with the policy in question.

Then you said:
Quote:
why? I can buy a new car. the materials were licensed for a great deal of money. somewhere the copyright holders deserve payment for the copying. aren't they being denied their deserved royalties?
Meaning so far, you're following me outside the analysis of the facts of the case and into the policy discussion. Great.

Which I continued here.

Which apparently prompted you the reverse field and go for your chest-thumping act.

Hank Chinaski 01-17-2013 04:39 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 476553)
Let's review.

I said, among other things:


You said, among other things:


And I said:


So, I responded to your simple analogy, which you used to justify your agreement with the policy in question.

Then you said:


Meaning so far, you're following me outside the analysis of the facts of the case and into the policy discussion. Great.

Which I continued here.

Which apparently prompted you the reverse field and go for your chest-thumping act.
I lack the energy to engage you.

Adder 01-17-2013 04:41 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 476550)
On 1, the only advantage you have over anyone in any interaction is what he doesn't know about you (or doesn't know about something important that you do know about). To collect data on someone is to develop a dossier, which allows you to understand him better, and to what end would anyone want to do that? To control what he does. To get him to buy something, or vote for something, or scare him into not saying or doing something.
You've worked out a nice argument, but I don't agree that trying to sell you thing more efficiently by knowing what you like is trying to control you.

We go through life as it is with lost of people trying to sell us stuff or get us to vote for something or say or do something. Most of it is noise, because we don't give a flying fuck about it. That's wasteful. Both of your time and of the advertisers time.

Getting rid of that waste through better targeting doesn't really bother me. In no small part because I can still say no (or at least I still believe I can say no, if you want to believe in some of the stronger theories on the effects of advertising).

As long as I retain the power to avoid the targets and the ads, I'm not particularly concerned.

Quote:
You give a person, or an organization, access to enough info to draw a rough caricature of your personality and you are forever weakened.
Perhaps if you see all human interactions as zero-sum.

Quote:
Re 2, the only digital places I'm forthcoming with details of what I'm thinking or doing, in any regard, are ones in which you don't know me by name.
Any moderately talented hacker could break that pretty quickly, or so I'm told.

Hank Chinaski 01-17-2013 06:52 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adder (Post 476555)
You've worked out a nice argument, but I don't agree that trying to sell you thing more efficiently by knowing what you like is trying to control you.

We go through life as it is with lost of people trying to sell us stuff or get us to vote for something or say or do something. Most of it is noise, because we don't give a flying fuck about it. That's wasteful. Both of your time and of the advertisers time.

Getting rid of that waste through better targeting doesn't really bother me. In no small part because I can still say no (or at least I still believe I can say no, if you want to believe in some of the stronger theories on the effects of advertising).

As long as I retain the power to avoid the targets and the ads, I'm not particularly concerned.



Perhaps if you see all human interactions as zero-sum.



Any moderately talented hacker could break that pretty quickly, or so I'm told.
speaking of people smarter than you, I hope you guys beat Michigan. Go .... What are you guys? Ps google image Tubby and Detroit mayor Dave Bing. Tubby with stache and weight loss is his twin.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-17-2013 06:57 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebastian_dangerfield (Post 476550)
You give a person, or an organization, access to enough info to draw a rough caricature of your personality and you are forever weakened.
The huge market caps of, e.g., Google and Facebook turn on the notion that once they know more about you, they can create value for you. And advertisers too, of course.

Hank Chinaski 01-17-2013 07:01 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 476563)
The huge market caps of, e.g., Google and Facebook turn on the notion that once they know more about you, they can create value for you. An advertisers too, of course.
"For you" or "of you?" You inability to see all the angles is why we fight so much. I wish there was a class I could send you to.

Tyrone Slothrop 01-17-2013 07:45 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 476564)
"For you" or "of you?" You inability to see all the angles is why we fight so much. I wish there was a class I could send you to.
Both, dingbat. If you click on an ad that's tailored to you, it's a choice you make that shows that you think there's some value there. Obviously, there's value for the advertiser, too, which is why I said that too. And you don't need to click on the ad. You can use Gmail without ever clicking on anything, free-riding on the fact that other people do click on ads relevant to the contents of their messages.

Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) 01-17-2013 08:15 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyrone Slothrop (Post 476565)
Both, dingbat. If you click on an ad that's tailored to you, it's a choice you make that shows that you think there's some value there. Obviously, there's value for the advertiser, too, which is why I said that too. And you don't need to click on the ad. You can use Gmail without ever clicking on anything, free-riding on the fact that other people do click on ads relevant to the contents of their messages.
Except that Facebook is aiming to generate revenue simply from displaying ads, not from clickthroughs like google-hence their partnership with Datalogix.

I don't think the pregnant women receiving Target coupons for formula and diapers necessarily saw added value from receiving those coupons.

ETA: "From" would be the correct preposition, Hank.

sebastian_dangerfield 01-17-2013 08:29 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Perhaps if you see all human interactions as zero-sum.
That's how advertisers see it. You're a mark. And it's axiomatic: The more a thing has to be marketed, the less value it intrinsically provides. I know what I want, and I seek it out. When something seeks me out desperately, I instinctively avoid it. (Kind of like a sorority girl. I only chase what's indifferent to me.)

I shudder to wonder what kid of person not only allows banner ads (who doesn't use ad block?), but actually clicks on them.

Quote:
Any moderately talented hacker could break that pretty quickly, or so I'm told.
And find what? Who has a computer with a unique internet device number listed to his own name? Who has a Facebook account linked to an email account not exclusively used for FB (holding no other contacts or info, save false data needed to open up the dummy email account)?

sebastian_dangerfield 01-17-2013 08:35 PM
Re: Loathing the Texas state legislature
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mmmm, Burger (C.J.) (Post 476566)
Except that Facebook is aiming to generate revenue simply from displaying ads, not from clickthroughs like google-hence their partnership with Datalogix.

I don't think the pregnant women receiving Target coupons for formula and diapers necessarily saw added value from receiving those coupons.

ETA: "From" would be the correct preposition, Hank.
Ghostery's the shit. No banners, no cookies, no nothing.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:08 AM.
Page 1 of 334 1 231151101 Last »
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
Hosted By: URLJet.com