Topic: Cheerful News (Read 38615 times)

Pacobird · « **Reply #320 on:** April 08, 2011, 06:18:32 AM »

I remember reading this AV Club review of GB as television comparing it to Lost: an interactive experience where viewers get on forums and try to parse the story as it unfolds. CBF to find it right now but if you read the AV Club (and you should!) it was a pretty interesting take.

And the media's going to spin this any number of ways because it IS news, but the real reason Fox dropped him is that they could no longer cover up how Glenn Beck raped and murdered a young girl in 1990.

Norondor · « **Reply #321 on:** April 08, 2011, 07:52:55 AM »

mike i love you

Thad · « **Reply #322 on:** April 10, 2011, 11:26:16 AM »

Dana Milbank adds that Beck's ratings have declined as unemployment has, and adds that his conspiracy theories became less palatable to his higher-ups as they increasingly blamed The Jews.

Some stuff in there I didn't know about -- I knew about his full episode of Soros hate, but didn't know he also hosted a guy who publicly argues in support of Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

All while comparing anyone who disagrees with him to Nazis, of course.

Shinra · « **Reply #323 on:** April 12, 2011, 10:26:37 AM »

The best is when he compares jewish people to Nazis, or implies collaboration.

Hilarious.

Beat Bandit · « **Reply #324 on:** April 12, 2011, 01:57:49 PM »

Quote from: Thad on April 10, 2011, 11:26:16 AM

his conspiracy theories became less palatable to his higher-ups as they increasingly blamed The Jews.

Büge · « **Reply #325 on:** May 05, 2011, 08:00:00 AM »

Gay Dads adopt and raise 12 children.

... In Arizona.

Cait · « **Reply #326 on:** May 05, 2011, 10:21:43 PM »

Judge rules that IP addresses are insufficient description for a John Doe lawsuit.

Shinra · « **Reply #327 on:** May 11, 2011, 10:00:15 AM »

I would like to hear the rationale for that ruling, and hope it would go beyond something as simple as "the judge did not understand how the internet works", because I can't think of any better way to identify someone over the internet than their IP address.

I don't want to side with the assholes throwing lawsuits around, I would just like to know the logic behind this.

It is probably explained in the article but I am at work and don't want to click torrentfreak.com. Is there an alternative source for this?

sei · « **Reply #328 on:** May 11, 2011, 10:38:51 AM »

Quote from: Shinra on May 11, 2011, 10:00:15 AM

I would like to hear the rationale for that ruling, and hope it would go beyond something as simple as "the judge did not understand how the internet works", because I can't think of any better way to identify someone over the internet than their IP address.

Some problems.

Dial-up services with changing IPs (though history can fix this one).
Multiple users of one cloud service.
Multiple users of one gateway IP (for an intranet).
Multiple users of one proxy.
Open/insecure WiFi.

I'm sure I missed a few.

Those go to a person's IP, which is more general than a computer or account. If you snoop cookies/SLOs, you can sometimes narrow it down to a computer or account, but there's no real guarantee that the owner of the computer/account was responsible for the transgression. E.g. your asshole relative visits and installs Limewire, and if you're especially naive, you don't know what Limewire is and don't really notice anything different on your rig other than a new green icon on your desktop.

Classic · « **Reply #329 on:** May 11, 2011, 10:58:25 AM »

Even without all of those, it's also possible to just have a computer perform activities without the real consent of its user. See bot-nets.

An IP might be usable to narrow down the offender to a machine, but until we're legally responsible for the actions of our accounts and the security thereof, we can't criminalize the failure to keep an account secure. Also I'd like to think we only punish or blame the victim if they're a woman.

Well, I just kicked that shit out of the cheerful news category. I need some coffee.

Thad · « **Reply #330 on:** May 11, 2011, 03:53:05 PM »

There's also the extortion issue. In cases where porn publishers threaten to sue alleged infringers, merely the act of naming someone as a defendant in such a case can cause irreparable harm to his reputation, even if he's ultimately found innocent. Even if you win, you still lose, and John Does would in many cases rather settle than be named publicly.

In cases where a person's reputation is at stake, burden of proof MUST be stronger than an IP.

Shinra · « **Reply #331 on:** May 11, 2011, 07:31:10 PM »

That's a solid argument, Thad. Makes sense to me.

Büge · « **Reply #332 on:** June 24, 2011, 08:49:53 PM »

New York governor signs same-sex marriage bill into law

Mongrel · « **Reply #333 on:** June 24, 2011, 08:58:45 PM »

Whereas here in Toronto, a rainbow flag appears to actually serve as "Mayor repellent".

Thad · « **Reply #334 on:** July 21, 2011, 06:02:08 PM »

Al Franken still a Senator; still Al Franken.

Franken Destroys Focus On The Family Witness

Zaratustra · « **Reply #335 on:** July 21, 2011, 08:07:32 PM »

FUCK YES YOU ARE THE BEST FRANKEN EVER

LaserBeing · « **Reply #336 on:** July 22, 2011, 07:12:08 PM »

uh excuse me

second best, maybe

JDigital · « **Reply #337 on:** July 22, 2011, 09:08:54 PM »

If she can do all these medical miracles, why can't she get rid of all those unsightly stitchmarks huh

Brentai · « **Reply #338 on:** July 22, 2011, 09:31:54 PM »

Why would she want to? They're clearly bringing the boys to the yard.

Büge · « **Reply #339 on:** July 30, 2011, 04:37:40 PM »

Woman goes into labour during bar exam, finishes bar exam and THEN goes to give birth

News:

Author Topic: Cheerful News (Read 38615 times)