Comments on: Steal These Policies http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/ On the theory and practice of networking Tue, 27 Jul 2010 05:28:42 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0 By: Richard Bennett http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/comment-page-1/#comment-429058 Richard Bennett Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:47:43 +0000 http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/#comment-429058 So snooping has to be voluntary. Hmmm.... So snooping has to be voluntary. Hmmm….

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/comment-page-1/#comment-429057 Seth Finkelstein Thu, 24 Dec 2009 09:42:54 +0000 http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/#comment-429057 Do I have to repeat the above a <em>fifth time</em>? I gave you a specific example, in detail, and you seem to have completely ignored it. "you have a problem with copyright, ..." Bah. You just want to write a rant, and not be confused with facts. If you don't have a problem with proposing a police state, I have a problem with that. Do I have to repeat the above a fifth time? I gave you a specific example, in detail, and you seem to have completely ignored it.

“you have a problem with copyright, …”

Bah. You just want to write a rant, and not be confused with facts.

If you don’t have a problem with proposing a police state, I have a problem with that.

]]> By: Richard Bennett http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/comment-page-1/#comment-429056 Richard Bennett Thu, 24 Dec 2009 08:45:20 +0000 http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/#comment-429056 Saying there's a gulf between two uses of the same technology isn't the same as proving it - it's just an assertion with no facts behind it. The real difference is how the data is used, not how it's collected. But this is all tangential; you have a problem with copyright, and the privacy business is just a smokescreen. Saying there’s a gulf between two uses of the same technology isn’t the same as proving it – it’s just an assertion with no facts behind it. The real difference is how the data is used, not how it’s collected. But this is all tangential; you have a problem with copyright, and the privacy business is just a smokescreen.

]]> By: Seth Finkelstein http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/comment-page-1/#comment-429055 Seth Finkelstein Thu, 24 Dec 2009 08:40:15 +0000 http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/#comment-429055 Fourth time: "There's a vast gulf between NielsenTV ratings and 1984 telescreens". There's levels of examination which go into "snooping", and conflating all them in a bid to justify the most extreme, is a deceptive argument. Do you honestly not see the difference? Are Nielsen TV ratings exactly the same thing as NSA wiretapping, because both are "snooping"? Somehow, the TV industry has a pro-rated measurement system that does not require a telescreen system. The point is that the requirements to "send somebody a check" allow for statistical estimation based on much looser requirements than those for throwing them in jail (criminal copyright infringement). To point out the obvious, Nielsen TV ratings are based on VOLUNTARY participation. So it's not a police state, even though a word like e.g. "monitoring" might be used in different senses. If your point somewhere is that attempting to commit fraud sometimes spurs criminal investigation, well, that's not very profound. There's a big difference between the occasional fraud investigation and treating everyone like criminals all the time. Fourth time: “There’s a vast gulf between NielsenTV ratings and 1984 telescreens”. There’s levels of examination which go into “snooping”, and conflating all them in a bid to justify the most extreme, is a deceptive argument.

Do you honestly not see the difference? Are Nielsen TV ratings exactly the same thing as NSA wiretapping, because both are “snooping”? Somehow, the TV industry has a pro-rated measurement system that does not require a telescreen system.

The point is that the requirements to “send somebody a check” allow for statistical estimation based on much looser requirements than those for throwing them in jail (criminal copyright infringement). To point out the obvious, Nielsen TV ratings are based on VOLUNTARY participation. So it’s not a police state, even though a word like e.g. “monitoring” might be used in different senses.

If your point somewhere is that attempting to commit fraud sometimes spurs criminal investigation, well, that’s not very profound. There’s a big difference between the occasional fraud investigation and treating everyone like criminals all the time.

]]> By: Richard Bennett http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/comment-page-1/#comment-429054 Richard Bennett Thu, 24 Dec 2009 06:53:03 +0000 http://broadbandpolitics.com/2009/12/steal-these-policies/#comment-429054 You're in favor of snooping packets to the extent necessary to identify copyrighted content, and so am I; the only difference between our positions is what's done with the information. If it's OK to do this in order to send somebody a check, it must be OK to use the same information to determine whether the sender is legitimate. You wouldn't want to send royalty checks to the Russian mafia, would you? You’re in favor of snooping packets to the extent necessary to identify copyrighted content, and so am I; the only difference between our positions is what’s done with the information. If it’s OK to do this in order to send somebody a check, it must be OK to use the same information to determine whether the sender is legitimate. You wouldn’t want to send royalty checks to the Russian mafia, would you?

]]>