Quote:
Originally Posted by Steve Jordan
Actually, with better security systems, being put on a no-fly list because of something so random as a similar name should happen less and less.
No doubt, false-positives suck, especially when you're the false positive. On the other hand, I'd rather be caught as a false-positive than be on the plane that went down because no one caught the true positive.
But are we getting slightly  here, debating terrorist security when the issue is protecting copyright concerns? Or are we just over-reacting a bit, seeing conspiracies around every corner? As Dennis pointed out, the government isn't concerned with little guys like us. They are also not so efficient as to be able to turn this extra scrutiny against us without our knowing about it. And don't forget, the government isn't a system... it's made up of people like us, doing a job.
Anyway, I don't challenge the fact that increased security/scrutiny requires increased care and oversight. Theoretically, that should only improve the efficiency and acceptance of the system. No process is worth doing, if it won't be done right. |
The discussion about security followed as an aside becasue the discussion went to the monitoring and control of the chaos that is the internet. In order to have laws that apply to the copyrights, you have to have metalegal control, which then leads to the process of control and the structure needed.