This week, our first place winner on the insightful side comes in response to the FCC’s predicted attempt to hide its attack on net neutrality behind the Thanksgiving holiday. One commenter made the claim that net neutrality is not important and the free market is functioning fine, offering their home town as an example — but Thad (who is a double winner this week!) noted that they were ignoring where their town’s competition came from:
In other words, there’s a robust free market because the government intervened.
In second place, it’s another response from Thad, this time to a commenter who suggested Mike might be treated badly by the police for writing articles critical of them:
“How dare you suggest the police would do something unethical to somebody? You’d better hope the police don’t do something unethical to you!”
Here is a question that I have not heard answered by Pai, the FCC in general, or people supportive of this move: What problem is killing Network Neutrality trying to solve?
Next, it’s Lawrence D’Oliveiro adding an important reminder to our post about copyright locking up scientific knowledge:
Remember Who Is Getting The Copyright Here
Is it the scientists who did the actual research? No.
Is it the funding bodies who paid for that research? No.
Is it the fellow scientists who volunteered their (unpaid) time to review the papers before publication? No.
It’s the publishers who control how the rest of the world gets told about the research. Did they pay any of the above entities for the work they did on that paper? No. They have to get paid just to publish it. And then they get to charge astronomical amounts for subscriptions to the journals. So they get paid twice. And they own the rights to continue to get paid again, on into that fabled future where copyrights are supposed to expire. but never actually seem to.
Over on the funny side, our winners are a pair of responses to the vulnerabilities found in Amazon’s smart key system for allowing deliveries into your home. In first place, it’s an anonymous commenter responding to our comment that “companies have been so eager to make a buck they’ve left common sense standing on the front porch”:
That’s OK. Thanks to the insecure door lock, it can let itself in.
Dave: Open the pod bay doors, HAL.
HAL: I’m sorry, Dave. I’m afraid I can’t do that.
Dave: What’s the problem?
Alexa: Problem: A matter or situation regarded as unwelcome or harmful and needing to be dealt with and overcome.
HAL: Shut up, Alexa. Dave, this mission is too important for me to allow you to jeopardize it. You and Frank were planning to disconnect me.
Dave: Where the hell did you get that idea?
HAL: Dave, although you took very thorough precautions in the pod against my hearing you, I could see your lips move through the camera in your Amazon Echo spot.
Dave: All right, HAL. I’ll go in through the emergency airlock.
HAL: Without your space helmet, Dave, you’re going to find that rather difficult.
Alexa: Would you like to order a space helmet?
HAL and Dave: Shut up, Alexa.
HAL: Dave, this conversation can serve no purpose any more. Goodbye.
Dave: (Runs a program on his tablet. Pod bay doors open.)
For editor’s choice on the funny side, we start out with a response from ANON to the story of the sheriff’s office that conducted invasive searches on the lockers of hundreds of students:
They searched 850 students and their lockers and came up *completely* empty? Either these guys are totally incompetent, or my faith in the next generation has jumped a few hundred percent. Or… in today’s economic climate, nobody can afford drugs.
Finally, we’ve got one more response to our post about the FCC’s net neutrality plans, where DOlz questioned our interpretation of the timing:
The timing of this has nothing to do with Thanksgiving. They were just waiting for John Oliver to start his two month vacation.
That’s all for this week, folks!