Reelin

13 ms·

91.
by Reelin 6y ago
> Small barriers to access have a huge impact on addiction. At the expense of those who legitimately need it. Given how ridiculous the current climate has become, I would almost certainly preemptively purchase black market opiates prior
92.
by Reelin 6y ago
>> That really depends on the jurisdiction and context. > If you haven't legitimately obtained ... I'm well aware and never claimed otherwise. I very clearly stated that it depends on the context. (It's right there i
93.
by Reelin 6y ago
I don't believe the general principle is limited to either software or tools. It is my understanding that the courts generally operate based on intent, particularly when it comes to criminal law. (For an arbitrary example, consider the
94.
by Reelin 6y ago
> No, I did not say anything at all about Article 13. Please re-read what I said. What? You very clearly stated that the content of Article 13 makes it easy to predict that the EU will attempt to make ad blocking illegal in the foreseeab
95.
by Reelin 6y ago
I was unaware that copyright in the UK was so extreme. That's unfortunate. The topic at hand, however, is a DMCA action between two US entities (the RIAA and GitHub) and so is purely a matter of US law AFAIK. My understanding (possibly
96.
by Reelin 6y ago
This came up recently on HN regarding Facebook taking legal action against two Chrome extensions. ( https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24661891 ) Scraping appears to violate the ToS. Tortious interference was brought up in
97.
by Reelin 6y ago
> youtube has it's own Download function in the mobile apps, even for copyrighted content Wait, seriously? I had no idea. I would think the presence of such a feature would severely undermine the RIAA's case.
98.
by Reelin 6y ago
> would a "derivative work" ... be considered to have a different intent? Probably not. If intent were to be demonstrated in court, a derivative work would almost certainly be tainted in turn unless those authors had a _really_
99.
by Reelin 6y ago
I do hope they fail, but regardless I think your analysis here is completely off base. The intent or action taken in this case is the creation, maintenance, and publication of the tool itself. At issue isn't the intent of any particula
100.
by Reelin 6y ago
That would be an interesting argument. I suspect it would be illegal because a pay per view stream is typically time limited. But if the stream itself were still valid while you were on the plane ... ?
101.
by Reelin 6y ago
> the intent was shown to exist already Well that's the question, isn't it? Is downloading those particular URLs infringement if the content is legally allowed to be hosted on YouTube in the first place? If so, was the use of t
102.
by Reelin 6y ago
I don't think saving things is in general a copyright violation? Knowingly and intentionally obtaining unlicensed content is a violation. Unauthorized redistribution is a violation. Saving and copying things isn't (AFAIK) a violat
103.
by Reelin 6y ago
Have you actually tried that lately? Particularly with a DASH stream? (Not that DASH itself is intended as DRM, but just that it's no longer anywhere near as simple as querying a single URL.)
104.
by Reelin 6y ago
> unit tests are evidence that the whole project is meant for copyright infringement Minor quibble, it's not so much infringement (Wouldn't that require redistribution? Or that the original upload itself be a violation?) as cir
105.
by Reelin 6y ago
> since plenty of people also have legitimate uses for this tool, and any other tool that allows them to do the same things is just as capable of downloading copyrighted youtube videos True, but _other_ people and _other_ tools aren&#x27
106.
by Reelin 6y ago
I think the recent LinkedIn case established that it is legal to scrape anything which is publicly available (ie no login required). Redistribution would be a copyright violation, but the scraping itself is legal. I'm not sure what tha
107.
by Reelin 6y ago
The signal is broadcast (ie not under your control) and so the sole purpose being permitted there is time shifting. YouTube is an on demand stream. It would be comparable to recording a pay per view movie that you purchased. Is that legal?
108.
by Reelin 6y ago
I don't think that's quite how it works. It's not (generally) capability that matters but rather intent. The RIAA would of course argue that examples of infringement in the test cases or readme demonstrate intent. A reasonabl
109.
by Reelin 6y ago
> modern languages Lisps are hardly a modern invention. "Modern" languages do seem to be ever so gradually working their way towards full compile time metaprogramming though, gaining a great deal of expressiveness in the proces
110.
by Reelin 6y ago
In passing your math looks correct but I don't think that's the right way to assess the resolution of the system here. The sample rate has a fixed spacing. Each sample will have some amplitude. Your ear reconstructs the sinusoid f
111.
by Reelin 6y ago
> Its focus is only to help those of us bound to Earth understand the counterintuitive forces that drive movement and maneuver in space. In an alternate reality, mastery of Kerbal Space Program becomes a political qualification.
112.
by Reelin 6y ago
I'm arguing that the contact themselves, not the node they use, is the primary threat. > Signal's goal, however, is to protect the masses and, thus, society as a whole, by protecting as many people's privacy as possible. S
113.
by Reelin 6y ago
You can't control the server operator though. In practice I have no way of preventing Signal from turning off SGX any time they feel like it because they aren't open and federated. They could push a software update and I'd be
114.
by Reelin 6y ago
Don't measures based on computational difficulty have the effect of erecting an impossibly high barrier for those with limited access to such resources? (The poor, anyone using a mobile device, etc). Any system with a reasonably low ba
115.
by Reelin 6y ago
Yeah, without the ability to query a particular identity it's not clear (to say the least) how you would go about filtering out malicious identities. To some extent, identity politics based on public associations is an unavoidable prob
116.
by Reelin 6y ago
> If “contact discovery” isn’t part of the core offering, it certainly makes a great attempt to look like it is. You are looking at only a single implementation here. The point is that this is a set of federated protocols that has been s
117.
by Reelin 6y ago
I agree, I never meant to imply that maintaining your own fork is simple. I was merely highlighting that the freedom to do so while still interoperating with everyone else is there. Centralization generally deprives you of that ability. It&
118.
by Reelin 6y ago
I tend to agree, but I think (perhaps mistakenly) that OP was trying to illustrate via analogy that it's more complicated than that. I wasn't able to see the point being made with the analogy though (hence my reply).
119.
by Reelin 6y ago
> kosher or halal marking on foods they sell, would you find that law constitutional ... no? It would be a law more or less targeting a particular religion. That's against both the letter and the spirit of the constitution. Unless I
120.
by Reelin 6y ago
You're really missing the point here. The core Matrix protocol doesn't handle contact discovery at all. An entirely separate system exists to facilitate contact discovery. You have to explicitly choose to publish an identifier to

More ›