>“But given your access to the MTA map on the MTA website, and the substantial similarities of your map to the MTA map, the only rational conclusion is that your map is based on the MTA Vignelli map.”
>But there is a potentially critical flaw in that logic. The MTA created The Weekender in 2011, two years after Berman created his map, which he uploaded to Wikipedia in 2009.
There needs to be consequences for such blatant fraud and abuse of the DMCA, ridiculous claims like this have gotten so common.
My perspective - I do not want to see ads relevant to my interests. If I want to buy something that I care about I'll do my own due diligence for what a good product is. I don't want to be lied to and distracted by junk marketing trying to convince me I should buy something.
"Devin Nunes' Cow" is obviously a satire account. As the judge ruled, a cow clearly can not tweet so nobody reasonably can believe that is actually his cow.
"ZweinerforTexas.com", "ZweinerforTx.com" are not obviously satire, they look like normal campaign urls and are clearly made to deceive.
In the US elections are run by the states, and unfortunately a certain consistent set of them are well known for making it extremely difficult for certain groups of people to vote. Since voter ids would be given by the states, there is historical evidence to suggest those specific states can not be trusted to not use said ids as a way to discriminate against those they do not want to vote.
So the answer is to throw our hands in the air and give up because our ancestors did something we now to be extremely harmful so we have to let everyone else do it too?
>We find that the ban worked for Reddit. More accounts than expected discontinued using the site; those that stayed drastically decreased their hate speech usage—by at least 80%. Though many subreddits saw an influx of r/fatpeoplehate andr/CoonTown “migrants,” those subreddits saw no significant changes in hate speech usage. In other words,other subreddits did not inherit the problem. We conclude by reflecting on the apparent success of the ban,discussing implications for online moderation, Reddit and internet communities more broadly
Considering fingerprint analysis is pseudoscience and almost entirely made up (along with most other "forensic science") [1] [2] we can assume LOTS AND LOTS of innocent people are caught with "fingerprint data"
>"There is some evidence that fingerprints are unique to each person, and it is plausible that careful analysis could accurately discern whether two prints have a common source, the report says. However, claims that these analyses have zero-error rates are not plausible; uniqueness does not guarantee that two individuals' prints are always sufficiently different that they could not be confused, for example. Studies should accumulate data on how much a person's fingerprints vary from impression to impression, as well as the degree to which fingerprints vary across a population. With this kind of research, examiners could begin to attach confidence limits to conclusions about whether a print is linked to a particular person."
I remember listening to a segment on NPR where it was claimed this was already solved and the "sonic attacks" were actually caused by a specific species of cricket: