Slashdot Mirror
Shocker: Despicable Conduct From Disney
An Anonymous Coward writes: "Phil Lelyveld, (email) a Vice President for Disney, has written to the FCC to tell them to ignore Digital Consumer's comments on the Broadcast Flag issue. The Broadcast Flag is an inter-industry conspiracy to turn over the keys to general-purpose computing to Hollywood studio execs -- under this proposal, no one will be able to ship digital television technology (like DVD recorders and FireWire) without Hollywood's permission. Lelyveld wrote to the FCC -- who are taking comments on the proposal -- without mentioning his day-job, to tell them that Digital Consumer, a civil liberties groups with more than 40,000 members, is nothing more than a "two dot.com millionaires" working to create a world "where we are all artist/waiters." Joined the EFF Yet? (or is it time to renew?) Update: 12/06 14:55 GMT by M : Lelyveld is not a lawyer. Here's a summary of his background.
Soon as I saw the story on the front page I knew what awaited inside. Hundreds of posts from zitty geeks trying to be punker-than-thou by coming up with ever-more-obscure namedropping to make up for their lack of real style (or to pretend that they are actually old enough to have been involved). Drop the pretension kiddos. We all know that your Blink 182 CD is older than your copy of Bollocks.
I love how a whole new level of conformity has been created by the average bozo's efforts at individuality. It might almost work if your personal definition of individuality didn't depend so heavily on how you present yourself to others. I mean, what's the sense of being into bullshit like [insert pseudo-non-mainstream hobby here] if you can't talk about it to make yourself superior to your peers?
Kinda sounds like the Linux crowd, huh? "I'm so ALTERNATIVE by patching my kernel every day while you brainwashed Windows sheep meander in unenlightened tedium." Funny to think that if you had back all the time you spent tweaking and patching (for no good reason other than to say you have the latest version), you wouldn't know what to do with the workstation on your desk.
*sigh*
excuse the rant. caffiene has yet to be digested.
Click here for their take on the issue!
Fortunately, Mattel's lawyer's are on our side, according to their press release!
All first posts belongs to b0ortman.
It's just chrisd... he seems incapable of going more than a few weeks at a time without utterly embarassing himself.
Well, I used to think that michael was a dumbass. Perhaps there is a competition at /.HQ for most bone headed story?
So far as I (and several others) can tell, this isn't News For Nerds. It's publishing unsubstantiated rants from an AC.
To top it off, you have set this stupid lawyer (is there any other kind) up for a massive slashdotting of his email server. Chris, I'd worry about liability exposure. Larry doesn't have the cash lying around to bail your sorry ass out, and I'm sure he'll hang you out to dry when this attorney sues VA for illegal denial of service.
Really, if you wanted to quit, just say so. If you are too tired, don't post a story. This could be one of the most shoddy pieces to go up in a long time. Christ, do you even know what 'editor' means? You guys seem to think it means 'crap sifter'. No, at least take a minute to look at the story and see if it seems bogus. It used to be you needed to have two sources to put something damning into print in a reputable newspaper. Apparantly, online, you need zero.
How about these for headlines:
Shocker: Slashdot 'Editor' Does Competent Job
Shocker: Slashdot Posts Yet Another Inflammatory Story
Shocker: Slashdot 'Editor' Fired For Sheer Idiocy
Shocker: Average Age of Slashdot Editor Revealed to be Fourteen
There was a bit of a hiccup when this story first came out. I got the static page a few times. Please, please, please tell me that someone cracked the byzantine Slashdot vault and posted this. Honestly, I'd have more respect for you for having a security hole than for posting this tripe on purpose.
Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
Right . . .
So what's the difference between a dead baby and a rock ?
You can't fuck a rock.
> Bush: "Iraq has weapons of mass destruction!"
...
/.)
> Sane people: "Proof?"
Bush: Well, we have this spy in this facility who has access to this information...
*gunshots heard from direction of Iraq*
Bush: Well, we have located this site...
*sound of moving vans starting heard*
Bush: Look, I can't tell you because that would endanger our sources! Besides, we sold him some of them.
Skeptics, ostriches, and people who jumped on the peacenik bandwagon: Yeah. Right, whatever. You're lying, you have to be lying, because a man who invaded his next door country and stonewalls the UN at every opportunity is to be trusted over you! You're just continuing Daddy's war!
Bush: But I...
Skeptics, ostriches, and bandwagon riders: No war!No war!No war!No war!
Bush: So go chant at Iraq. Or Osama. Is the chief of police a crimemonger?! Am I at fault, just for pointing this out and suggesting maybe something ought to be done about it?
Skeptics, ostriches, and bandwagon riders: YES!
At first I thought to post this anonymously, but screw it.
Commiting karmic suicide*,
SomeGuyFromCA
(*: by posting an unpopular yet honest opinion on
Skeptics, ostriches, and bandwagon riders: You can't possibly think that way! No right minded individual could possibly think that way, because that upsets my worldview that everyone thinks just like me! You must be a troll!
if the answer isn't violence, neither is your silence / freedom of expression doesn't make it alright
Redholes are slashdot's 'divide by zero' exceptions.
I did some serious searching on dictionary.com's thesaurus, which is why "I'd be very happy" was replaced with "I'd jizz myself".
Don't thank me, thank the knife!
There is currently a lot of controversy about Mr. Phil Lelyveld's disquisitions, and I know that any letter on the subject will almost certainly cause someone to produce a large number of thoroughly sordid extravagancies, most gormless indecencies, and, above all, the most possession-obsessed blasphemies against everything that I hold most sacred and most dear. Still, I unequivocally hope that Mr. Lelyveld's punishment fits his crime. Before I begin, let me point out that Mr. Lelyveld spouts a lot of numbers whenever he wants to make a point. He then subjectively interprets those numbers to support his ruses while ignoring the fact that his machinations may have been conceived in idealism, but they quickly degenerated into unpleasant, vexatious Pyrrhonism. He has, on a number of occasions, expressed a desire to cause the destruction of human ambition and joy. On all of these occasions, I submitted to the advice of my friends, who assured me that prudence is no vice. Cowardice -- especially his ultra-untrustworthy form of it -- is. I use such language purposefully -- and somewhat sardonically -- to illustrate how if we are to turn random, senseless violence into meaningful action, then we must be guided by a healthy and progressive ideology, not by the materialistic and sophomoric ideologies that Mr. Lelyveld promotes. Let me back up a little: Of all of his exaggerations and incorrect comparisons, one in particular stands out: "The only way to expand one's mind is with drugs -- or maybe even chocolate." I don't know where he came up with this, but his statement is dead wrong. This may sound like caricature, but we are at a crossroads. One road leads into the light of a bright, shining future in which wayward, drugged-out blusterers like Mr. Lelyveld are completely absent. The other road leads into the darkness of Fabianism. The question, therefore, is: Who's driving the bus? This is not a question that we should run away from. Rather, it is something that needs to be addressed quickly and directly, because it would be wrong to imply that Mr. Lelyveld is involved in some kind of conspiracy to destroy the values, methods, and goals of traditional humanistic study. It would be wrong because his beliefs are far beyond the conspiracy stage. Not only that, but I frequently wish to tell him that those who destroy everything beautiful and good must be held accountable for their actions. But being a generally genteel person, however, I always bite my tongue.
Unsettling as that is, the more infuriating fact is that while we do nothing, those who perpetuate inaccurate and dangerous beliefs about male-female relationships are gloating and smirking. And they will keep on gloating and smirking until we counteract the subtle, but pervasive, social message that says that university professors must conform their theses and conclusions to Mr. Lelyveld's flippant prejudices if they want to publish papers and advance their careers. Far too many people tolerate Mr. Lelyveld's ramblings as long as they're presented in small, seemingly harmless doses. What these people fail to realize, however, is that there are those who are informed and educated about the evils of denominationalism, and there are those who are not. Mr. Lelyveld is one of the uninformed, naturally, and that's why he is absolutely determined to believe that violence and prejudice are funny, and he's not about to let facts or reason get in his way.
Have you ever had a bad dream about Mr. Lelyveld trying to impact public policy for years to come? Well, I have news for you. That wasn't a dream; it was real. I'm sticking out my neck a bit in talking about his hijinks. It's quite likely he will try to retaliate against me for my telling you that the space remaining in this letter will not suffice even to enumerate the ways in which he has tried to treat anyone who doesn't agree with him to a torrent of vitriol and vilification. Incidentally, Mr. Lelyveld's recalcitrant, vengeful epithets leave the current power structure untouched while simultaneously killing countless children through starvation and disease. Are these children his enemies? The answer to this question gives the key not only to world history, but to all human culture. Well, sure; Mr. Lelyveld respects nothing and no one, but that doesn't change reality.
His policies reek of so much mandarinism that the smell makes me nauseated, and if you don't believe me, then you should discuss, openly and candidly, a vision for a harmonious, multiracial society. It doesn't take a genius to figure out that his dupes all look like him, think like him, act like him, and retard the free and natural economic development of various countries' indigenous population, just like Mr. Lelyveld does. And all this in the name of -- let me see if I can get their propaganda straight -- brotherhood and service. Ha! Please remember that his threats reek of frotteurism. I use the word "reek", because his announcements are destructive. They're morally destructive, socially destructive -- even intellectually destructive. And, as if that weren't enough, I feel no more personal hatred for him than I might feel for a herd of wild animals or a cluster of poisonous reptiles. One does not hate those whose souls can exude no spiritual warmth; one pities them. Mr. Lelyveld can't attack my ideas, so he attacks me. It could be worse, I suppose. He could sucker us into buying a lot of junk we don't need.
Forgive me if I ramble; I'm really upset, as I think you can tell. What I call blockish segregationists are the lowest form of human life. (Actually, he floats with the tide of flagitious, wild totalitarianism, especially when driven by the gravitational pull of interdenominationalism, but that's not important now.) I cannot conceive of any circumstance under which Mr. Lelyveld's ravings could be considered appropriate. Am I saying that I am appalled by the vast generalizations in Mr. Lelyveld's claim that it is not only acceptable, but indeed desirable, to advocate fatalistic acceptance of a juvenile new world order? Yes. That I am not making a generalization when I say that he upholds sin as sacred? Maybe. That this kind of thing makes me wonder whether we've ever moved past supercilious anti-intellectualism at all? Definitely.
Mr. Lelyveld's deputies think that we ought to worship morbid buffoons as folk heroes. I say to them, "Prove it" -- not that they'll be able to, of course, but because Mr. Lelyveld's manuscripts constitute an instigation to spam the Internet with stingy e-mail. For proof of this fact, I must point out that Mr. Lelyveld truly believes that anyone who dares to push the envelope on our knowledge of the world around us can expect to suffer hair loss and tooth decay as a result. I hope you realize that that's just a predaceous pipe dream from a money-grubbing pipe, and that in the real world, it will not be easy to deal with the relevant facts. Nevertheless, we must attempt to do exactly that, for the overriding reason that I must part company with many of my peers when it comes to understanding why his opinions are egocentric, poisonous to young minds, and disrespectful to Western values and achievements. My peers claim that relative even to whiney scamps, he is more excitable, more violent, less sexually restrained, more impulsive, more prone to crime, less altruistic, less inclined to follow rules, and less cooperative. While this is doubtlessly true, I believe we must add that he insists that everyone with a different set of beliefs from his is going to get a one-way ticket to Hell. This is a rather strong notion from someone who knows so little about the subject. While it is reasonable to expect that pusillanimous negativism has come to occupy a squalid place in the national dialogue, it remains that Mr. Lelyveld says that he understands the difference between civilization and savagery. Yet he also wants to issue a flood of bogus legal documents. Am I the only one who sees the irony there? I ask, because I undeniably hope that the truth will prevail and that justice will be served before Mr. Lelyveld does any real damage. Or is it already too late? I don't pretend to know the answer, but I do know that if I have a bias, it is only against hate-filled, benighted crackpots who pigeonhole people into predetermined categories. The union of theory and practice, in Mr. Lelyveld's hands, becomes a union of pomposity and ruffianism. Okay, that's a slight exaggeration, but you get the drift. It's possible that Mr. Lelyveld doesn't realize this because he has been ingrained with so much of vandalism's propaganda. If that's the case, I recommend that we raise the quality of debate on issues surrounding his brutal, imprudent teachings. When I first became aware of his covert invasion into our thought processes, all I could think was how it's our responsibility to lend support to the thesis that we are now stuck with a self-pitying oligarchism bearing a human face -- that of Phil Lelyveld. That's the first step in trying to clarify and correct some of the inaccuracies present in his complaints, and it's the only way to question authority. It should be intuitively obvious even to the most casual observer that the really interesting thing about all this is not that he should show some class. The interesting thing is that I frequently talk about how if the word "extraterritoriality" occurs to the reader, he or she may recall that Mr. Lelyveld once tried to rescue defeatism from the rubbish heap of history, dust it off, slap on a coat of cheap sophistry, and market it as new and improved. I would drop the subject, except that his buddies do not concern themselves much with the people around them. Mr. Lelyveld's lickspittles probably don't realize that, because it's not mentioned in the funny papers or in the movies. Nevertheless, his idiotic claim that mediocrity and normalcy are ideal virtues is just that, an idiotic claim.
What's more, thanks to Mr. Lelyveld, what I call xenophobic hooligans can now freely show us a gross miscarriage of common judgment -- and Mr. Lelyveld knows it. Is it any wonder that he neglects the impact that selfishness has on the soul? Didn't he tell his foot soldiers that he wants to spread hatred, animosity, and divisiveness? Did he first give any thought to what would happen if he did? Of course, that question is ridiculous -- as ridiculous as his abominable effusions. As a parenthetical note, I must ask that Mr. Lelyveld's toadies improve the living conditions of the most vulnerable in our society -- the sick, the old, the disabled, the unemployed, and our youth -- all of whose lives are made miserable by Phil Lelyveld. I know they'll never do that, so here's an alternate proposal: They should, at the very least, back off and quit trying to up the ante considerably.
I used to think that stuck-up stool pigeons were the most jejune people on the planet, but now I know that if it weren't for inimical porn stars, Mr. Lelyveld would have no friends. Not to be rude or anything, but his zingers are built on lies, and they depend on make-believe for their continuation. Did it ever occur to Mr. Lelyveld that he refuses to do anything for himself? Before you answer, let me point out that he may be reasonably cunning with words. However, he is utterly sexist with everything else. What kind of loser wants to introduce, cultivate, and encourage moral rot? A loser like Mr. Lelyveld. My point here is that all of the bad things that are currently going on are a symptom of his prudish biases. They are not a cause; they are an effect.
Please don't ask me to reward mediocrity. I simply can't do that. We need to lead each other towards the understanding that Mr. Lelyveld still labors under the outmoded pretense that a plausible excuse is a satisfactory substitute for performance, by which I mean that he should not lead us into an age of shoddiness -- shoddy goods, shoddy services, shoddy morals, and shoddy people. Not now, not ever. Nobody wants him to make serious dialogue difficult or impossible, but Mr. Lelyveld insists on doing it anyway.
If he wants to combine, in a rare mixture, bestial cruelty and an inconceivable gift for lying, let him wear the opprobrium of that decision. I can fight only for something that I love, love only what I respect, and respect only what I at least know. Period, finis, and Q.E.D. And that's what writing this sort of letter is all about. It's a way to reveal some shocking facts about Mr. Phil Lelyveld's editorials.
You are either troll or absolute idiot. I would guess both.