Obama to Address the Nation Each Week on YouTube | Hacker News Reader

Obama to Address the Nation Each Week on YouTube

readwriteweb.com

20 pointsAnon8425 comments

Open articleView on HN

The video responses should be great.

Don't want to sound like a broken record, but Youtube + Obama + ReadWriteWeb = Hacker News?

No, you don't sound like a broken record at all. Hacker News needs people like you marking things.

This story got marked as dead the moment I flagged it.

Make sure to flag it.

I did, and then I went to the "New" page and voted up a couple of stories I liked.

Great, now Obama gets to wade through the morass of YouTube comments. Welcome to Hell, Mr. President.

I do hope that the videos themselves are accompanied by a copyleft or otherwise liberal license.

All* works of the US government are under public domain anyways:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Gover...

*almost, with a few exceptions

with a few exceptions

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4837061

Government workers classified over 15 million documents last year, more than twice the number classified in 2001

Most of these Classified documents will still probably be in the public domain before the any of the bond movies.

Thanks, Disney ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonny_Bono_Copyright_Term_Exten... )

If it is going to be produced by the US government wouldn't it belong to the state, therefore to US citizens?

Following your logic... should any citizen be given access to the plans of american nukes? "it was produced by the US government, it belongs to the state and therefore to US citizens".

No, your statement doesn't follow my logic.

  1 OP: Hopes for Copyleft license.
  2 My reply: [The public video] would belong to the State [therefore to US citizens.]
  3 Your smart-ass reply: [Something else owned by the state, not public] belongs to the State, so it should be public.

I think yours qualifies as refuse by converse fallacy of accident. But you don't just make a wrong generalization, you also change the reason: copyright vs. disclosure.

If you followed my logic, it would be:

  The plans of American nukes were produced by the government, therefore they belong to US citizens.

In fact, my post has a question mark as I am not a US citizen and I don't fully understand state ownership, so I wasn't even making a statement.

While there, as you came full aggressive, let's review your grammar:

  * After ellipsis, capitalize (perhaps it should just be a comma.)
  * [It's] American, not "american."
  * Again capitalize after quotation mark. [Edit: Capitalize after question mark, not after quotation mark.]

And you are not quoting me or anybody else so there is no need of quotation marks.

My disclaimer: my English is poor as I am foreign and last time I studied logic was over 15 years ago.

I appreciate your use of logic and reasoning, but as a point of fact, you are wrong about quotation mark usage.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quotation_mark

Quotation marks are overloaded in english =)

Thank you <:D

[I actually hate grammar-nazis and love gramar-nazi-nazis. The tone of my response and the grammar part was mocking the logic-nazi FAIL ;)]

Not logic, just law: in general, government publications aren't covered by copyright. For more details, you could JFGI, or have a look at the wikipedia article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Work_of_the_United_States_Gover... .

To the best of my knowledge, US nuke plans aren't generally published. Obama's speeches on Youtube certainly are.

Edit: just noticed that this link is also below. Oh well, it's a somewhat different posting than the one below.

I think you missed my [question] mark. Unless you thought it was [a rhetorical question.] If [you thought] so, my inexcusably poor English structure is to blame. Thanks for the link, it is very insightful and adds to the conversation.

[Edit: My first comment used the word "belong" and not "copyright." It wasn't by accident as I was thinking it could be public domain.]

http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/

Parody time.

The way Obama is using the web could be a powerful trend.

Does anyone else smell an opportunity for start-ups?

So I have to install proprietary software (Flash) in order to participate in our society? Nice...

Of all the complaints you could make, this is probably the silliest.

Obama's delivering weekly video messages online, to theoretically talk with America and update its people. How are you expecting him to deliver video in a context that makes his work very accessible? YouTube is the most popular site, and it uses Flash. Unless you want him to release videos as .oggs, and get feedback as email, Flash is the most effective system.

All I'm saying is that Adobe can't get Flash to work correctly on my machine, so that means I don't get to take advantage of this. If they used Theora/Vorbis, it would work on every computer made in the last 10+ years.

Is using Windows, OSX, or x86 Linux a citizenship requirement now?

Of course it's not. Same as how owning a radio wasn't a citizenship requirement when FDR was president.

Adobe doesn't have a business obligation to get Flash to work for minority OSs. They work for 99.9% of computers, and that's pretty excellent as-is.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com