71–80 of 126 posts
* Wow does the CFAA need reform.
* With the rate that tech is advancing, it's becoming a problem how unfamiliar with it many in the justice system are. It's not a knock on them at all - it's hard to keep up for those of us working in the industry. I'm not sure what the best solution is outside of trying to make sure that the laws are as correctly formulated as possible, and even that's only a partial fix.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I would say it to his face, but point taken. :)
Fair enough, but just because you'd say it to someone's face doesn't make it civil
I consider what Facebook is doing to be far more uncivil than use of the word Fuck. Should the word Facebook be censored because what it refers to offends me?
This highlights two major issues, to me: * Wow does the CFAA need reform. * With the rate that tech is advancing, it's becoming a problem how unfamiliar with it many in the justice system are. It's not a knock on them at all - it's hard to keep up for those of us working in the industry. I'm not sure what the best solution is outside of trying to make sure that the laws are as correctly formulated as possible, and ev…
People say that a lot. But yet you don't really hear doctors saying "how can a judge hear a case about a medical issue!" (look maybe some say that but not a lot).
The court has a solution for this -- they have expert witnesses and amicus briefs.
The problem is that technologists are allergic to politics (filing amicus briefs is basically politics as is lobbying), so they won't do what they need to do to make tech issues heard.
Vachani is based in Brazil, where life is more affordable. He flies into San Francisco a lot, though, in an ongoing effort to stay in the tech biz. So, open question, how much cheaper does it have to be in Brazil to make it worthwhile to live there because it's cheaper, if you are flying into SF a lot? I mean, I know SF is expensive, but presumably if you are willing to make ~$600 flights on a regular basis, you woul…
Basically this guy is your friend I don't like.
I understand not liking the walled garden, but if you don't like it, then you shouldn't enter it in the first place. Don't go into the garden and then give your friend a key to the place just to avoid me.
If I say you can put your diamond ring in my house and then give you a key, but tell you that if you want your ring you have to let me talk to you for five minutes every time you get it, and then you give your key to a friend who I don't like, don't I have the right to keep that person out, even though you gave them the key I gave you? Basically this guy is your friend I don't like. I understand not liking the walled…
> but tell you that if you want your ring you have to let me talk to you for five minutes every time you get it
to:
> but mumble to you (unintelligibly, interspersed with vast amounts of mumbling about other things) that if you want your ring you have to let me talk to you for five minutes every time you get it
While many on this site keep up with some of these things and can weigh the cost/benefit of using a walled garden, many do not. To tell someone "if you don't like it, don't do it" while completely avoiding the question of subversiveness on the part of the contract maker is disingenuous and not giving both sides of the argument a fair shake.
Vachani is based in Brazil, where life is more affordable. He flies into San Francisco a lot, though, in an ongoing effort to stay in the tech biz. So, open question, how much cheaper does it have to be in Brazil to make it worthwhile to live there because it's cheaper, if you are flying into SF a lot? I mean, I know SF is expensive, but presumably if you are willing to make ~$600 flights on a regular basis, you woul…
1BR apartment in SF is ~$3300
1BR apartment in New Orleans is ~$1300.
$24K/yr in savings on rent alone. Even if you fly in 8 times per year, for a round trip cost of $1K with food and accommodations, you're still well ahead.
If you live abroad, and can earn USD and take advantage of the exchange rate, you're even farther ahead. A 1BR apartment in Sao Paolo is ~600USD.
This highlights two major issues, to me: * Wow does the CFAA need reform. * With the rate that tech is advancing, it's becoming a problem how unfamiliar with it many in the justice system are. It's not a knock on them at all - it's hard to keep up for those of us working in the industry. I'm not sure what the best solution is outside of trying to make sure that the laws are as correctly formulated as possible, and ev…
> With the rate that tech is advancing, it's becoming a problem how unfamiliar with it many in the justice system are. People say that a lot. But yet you don't really hear doctors saying "how can a judge hear a case about a medical issue!" (look maybe some say that but not a lot). The court has a solution for this -- they have expert witnesses and amicus briefs. The problem is that technologists are allergic to polit…
This actually is something that comes up reasonably often. In fact, when I was in law school, an entire week of Torts was spent on precisely this issue. It's not unique to technology, but the frequency in which it comes up, as well as the total number of people directly (by that, I mean their day to day life could materially change overnight) is much higher.
You aren't wrong about technologists and politics, though. I hadn't really thought about amicus briefs as a solution, thanks for pointing it out.
Vachani is based in Brazil, where life is more affordable. He flies into San Francisco a lot, though, in an ongoing effort to stay in the tech biz. So, open question, how much cheaper does it have to be in Brazil to make it worthwhile to live there because it's cheaper, if you are flying into SF a lot? I mean, I know SF is expensive, but presumably if you are willing to make ~$600 flights on a regular basis, you woul…
Rent is the killer in SF. Forget about Brazil and imagine even a cheap American city. 1BR apartment in SF is ~$3300 1BR apartment in New Orleans is ~$1300. $24K/yr in savings on rent alone. Even if you fly in 8 times per year, for a round trip cost of $1K with food and accommodations, you're still well ahead. If you live abroad, and can earn USD and take advantage of the exchange rate, you're even farther ahead. A 1B…
Sure, but my point was that if you view SF as integral for some reason, you can find 1BR apartment rentals for ~$1300 (and 2 bedroom for $1400) an hour North of SF. If you're willing to go slightly over 2 hours from SF (which if you've considering flying in occasionally isn't bad at all), you can find 2 BR apartments for It's not a beach in a tropical climate, but it sure is cheaper, and you could actually swing commuting in once or twice a week without too much strain (depending on whether you do it during rush hour). Too rural for you? Sacramento, the state capital, has apartments available for not much more (and a similar non-rush hour commute).
There's a trade-off going on here, and I'm wondering at what point it makes more sense to fly in from outside the country compared to just commuting a few hours occasionally.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Even when considered only as an analogy, and not the serious point about trivializing "rapist", it's a lousy analogy. Consider a panhandler asking you for money on the street, someone passing out fliers in a mall, a street hawker, or even someone asking for directions. These can all be unwanted physical interactions. Think also of the religious people who go door-to-door asking very politely if you've found everlasti…
> I submit that spamming is much closer to these unwanted public interactions than anything like rape. None of those things are illegal, so you've already failed the most basic test for the analogy. Furthermore, you still seem to be missing the point that this is not an analogy between spamming and rape, but between falsely accusing someone of spamming and falsely accusing someone of rape . > Is it as devastating as…
FB claimed that Power Ventures's actions fell under the CAN-SPAM Act, and was a violation of the act, and was a willful violation so FB could get 3x damages as restitution, plus attorney fees.
There is nothing like that in rape law, where some rapes are legal and some are illegal. There are things like that in anti-peddling laws, which might allow only licensed peddlers in a region, or in telephone solicitation laws, which might restrict when calls can be made or prevent solicitors from calling people on a no-call list, or anti-bill posting laws which restrict posting a few public bulletin boards or kiosks, or anti-begging laws which prohibit aggressive panhandling.
That's of course the legal distinction. Perhaps there is a cultural similarity in antipathy between the two that I don't recognize?
You point about my hypothetical is valid. I was thinking more of conferences with an anti-sexual harassment policy which obligates the organizers to be more responsive to claims of rape than claims of murder, even if there is no other evidence.
So, here's something more concrete. In http://www.swordandthescript.com/2014/06/linkedin-spam-reels... we see that Grant Crowell complained about "crass spam" by ReelSEO in advertising for their conference. He provided evidence of receiving on Linkedin, in one week, "the same message sent four different times, from three different people, including Greg Jarboe, co-founder of the marketing firm SEO-PR." ReelSEO (now known as Tubular Insights) responded to the complaint by by saying 'opt out'.
This is not illegal spam under CAN-SPAM. However, and IMO, Crowell does correctly refer to it as spam. This is within the usual cultural definition of spamming.
What are the "devastating social consequences" which resulted from that verified claim? I note that ReelSEO is still in business, under the new name "Tubular Insights". Should Crowell and others avoid using the term 'spammer' for anything other than verifiable CAN SPAM violations, because of these consequences?
Now, imagine that someone made a claim of being raped, and had evidence to prove it. Do you really think that the reactions would be the same? (Nor can one "opt out" of rape, showing yet again it's a poor analogy.)
As for "a multibillion dollar corporation suing you"; I look at how ACORN was shut down due to partially falsified and selectively edited videos when the ACORN members did nothing illegal or inappropriate. The devastation came from how FB's money and power could magnify any sort of FUD.
Now, I can be wrong. Wikipedia tells me that ~1% of all spam really meets CAN SPAM's requirements, so there are a lot of spammers out there. Who else has faced the devastating social consequences of being called a spammer?