It's karma, bro! Shouldn't have been a douchbag in your past life...
This is just a clear example of how "fighting terrorism" is merely used to justify any increase in surveillance on the populace. Actually giving a shit about the welfare of the individual citizens isn't even on the radar. That's why the argument is so useful, since it's up to each citizen to add "for my wellbeing" to "fighting terrorism"... they feel like they are agreeing with the given reason when they fill in the blank.
Your matter-of-fact statement is utterly chilling. Yet this is exactly the mindset many governments and corporations (are they really still separate entities?) have adopted.
Here you are babbling about large trackers... you did know Mininova didn't even run a tracker, right? It was just an index... hence why it was so large.
The problem is that they really don't move. They merely claim they are based in the Cayman Islands to get out of taxes while staying right where they are. If they actually picked up and moved to the Cayman Islands, then I would have no problem with it.
The current "have your cake and eat it, too" situation is bullshit.
This sounds like a huge fucking waste of time, and it won't be done seriously for more than the first 3 days or so. The amount of freight bound for the US has to be absolutely enormous.
It would be more accurate to say that corporatism rose to power in the period 1870-1913 has been the dominant force in America since ~1913. It was nowhere near as entrenched before that. After all, Jackson was able to fight off the idea of a central bank, and the Sherman anti-trust act was passed in 1890 because there were still actually enough people opposed to big business to vote for it. How likely would such a bill pass the legislature today?
The creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 was the real start of the USA becoming a corporatist state.
I absolutely agree with your point. People should be mad as hell about this bullshit double standard, but instead we have a bunch of folks apologizing for it.
Apparently, the money spent on corporate propaganda is money well spent.
On place you don't see a clock anywhere is in a store like Walmart... other than on the registers, but they don't like it when you get up close to the register.
Ironically, I could torrent just fine on a 50mbit connection at my university. 1 hour spent in the student union could easily see me upload 8-10GB... very handy for private sites.
A very good point. I thought nothing of the impact the number of links on a page could have on navigation until I watched my girlfriend or my brother try to figure out which link was the one they needed when downloading software.
Depends on who you ask. If you ask me, torrents not only clogs my connection regardless of upload/download speed so no one can browse the net, but are actually slower than most http/ftp downloads that support a few simultaneous connections.
Any reasonable client lets you control how much bandwidth it uses... it's up to you to know how to configure your client so it allows you to do other things while you torrent.
That's why rapidshare et all are so popular.
Most people can't afford as much upload capacity as RS has... that isn't cheap, you know. My argument is that torrents are more useful for the uploader of the files, not necessarily the downloader.
Besides, most people don't know what torrents are. You can't have them front and center to general users.
Why is that? Because of the negative rap that torrents get. Which is why the bullshit in the original AC's post is a troll. I'm refuting this point of view.
I understand exactly how torrents work. You are doing more with less in the sense that the file's uploading does not depend on only your bandwidth capabilities... which were not sufficient in the Ubuntu example I gave.
Torrents ought to be choice #1 in distributing files of any decent size. As an example, I thought it was utterly retarded that the recent Ubuntu 9.10 release didn't have the download torrents front and center. Why the hell not? Obviously they didn't have the bandwidth to handle all the direct downloads, as I started one just to see how slowly it would go. It crawled along at less than 1 KB/s for hours. They had the torrents advertised on the forums, at least, but they clearly made the launch harder on their servers than it should have been.
Torrents let you do more with less bandwidth. Take advantage of that! I understand some people may not be able to use them because of their ISP being a douchbag or whatever, and those people will need normal HTTP/FTP transactions and mirrors... but everyone else can use torrents and share your burden with you.
The problem is that "micro-transactions" have crept into every aspect of life.
If take the time to add up all your "buck here, buck there" transactions, you may be surprised just how much you spend.
The entire system is set up to maximize impulse buys and hide the total cost of purchases by splitting it up into bits.
People go for free because it is less than $1 or 25 cents or even 1 cent. Isn't it exactly that fact why so many things are outsourced to China, India, etc? To save just a little bit on each transaction?
It's real just the whole "pot meet kettle" issue. Everybody will go will spending as little as they can. The only difference is that businesses have an easier time making their cost cutting measures legal and those of individuals illegal, and then trying to use words like "intellectual property" and "piracy" to give a moralistic tone to the debate along with their stacked legal deck.
It's a bunch of dishonesty, ultimately, and it's obvious that lots normal people aren't convinced that this "priracy" is so terrible.. Nor should they be.
Slashdot Mirror
Not every website needs to incorporate a bunch of Web 2.0 bullshit. /. could learn a thing or two from Craigslist about simplicity.
It's karma, bro! Shouldn't have been a douchbag in your past life...
This is just a clear example of how "fighting terrorism" is merely used to justify any increase in surveillance on the populace. Actually giving a shit about the welfare of the individual citizens isn't even on the radar. That's why the argument is so useful, since it's up to each citizen to add "for my wellbeing" to "fighting terrorism"... they feel like they are agreeing with the given reason when they fill in the blank.
Citizens break laws.
Your matter-of-fact statement is utterly chilling. Yet this is exactly the mindset many governments and corporations (are they really still separate entities?) have adopted.
What a unjust world...
Here you are babbling about large trackers... you did know Mininova didn't even run a tracker, right? It was just an index... hence why it was so large.
If you want /. to take action against these posts, you'll have to join the church of Scientology first.
Then they'll listen. :)
Whoa... very cool! Thank you.
The problem is that they really don't move. They merely claim they are based in the Cayman Islands to get out of taxes while staying right where they are. If they actually picked up and moved to the Cayman Islands, then I would have no problem with it.
The current "have your cake and eat it, too" situation is bullshit.
What does Mongolia have to do with this story?
Center-right, I'd say.
You prefer snobs to slobs, eh?
This sounds like a huge fucking waste of time, and it won't be done seriously for more than the first 3 days or so. The amount of freight bound for the US has to be absolutely enormous.
It would be more accurate to say that corporatism rose to power in the period 1870-1913 has been the dominant force in America since ~1913. It was nowhere near as entrenched before that. After all, Jackson was able to fight off the idea of a central bank, and the Sherman anti-trust act was passed in 1890 because there were still actually enough people opposed to big business to vote for it. How likely would such a bill pass the legislature today?
The creation of the Federal Reserve in 1913 was the real start of the USA becoming a corporatist state.
Easier to see it than try to explain:
http://vaio-online.sony.com/prod_info/vgn-ux17gp/
I absolutely agree with your point. People should be mad as hell about this bullshit double standard, but instead we have a bunch of folks apologizing for it.
Apparently, the money spent on corporate propaganda is money well spent.
Liar.
I have no virus scanner, as I use Linux. :)
On place you don't see a clock anywhere is in a store like Walmart... other than on the registers, but they don't like it when you get up close to the register.
You must be new here.
Ironically, I could torrent just fine on a 50mbit connection at my university. 1 hour spent in the student union could easily see me upload 8-10GB... very handy for private sites.
A very good point. I thought nothing of the impact the number of links on a page could have on navigation until I watched my girlfriend or my brother try to figure out which link was the one they needed when downloading software.
Depends on who you ask. If you ask me, torrents not only clogs my connection regardless of upload/download speed so no one can browse the net, but are actually slower than most http/ftp downloads that support a few simultaneous connections.
Any reasonable client lets you control how much bandwidth it uses... it's up to you to know how to configure your client so it allows you to do other things while you torrent.
That's why rapidshare et all are so popular.
Most people can't afford as much upload capacity as RS has... that isn't cheap, you know. My argument is that torrents are more useful for the uploader of the files, not necessarily the downloader.
Besides, most people don't know what torrents are. You can't have them front and center to general users.
Why is that? Because of the negative rap that torrents get. Which is why the bullshit in the original AC's post is a troll. I'm refuting this point of view.
I understand exactly how torrents work. You are doing more with less in the sense that the file's uploading does not depend on only your bandwidth capabilities... which were not sufficient in the Ubuntu example I gave.
Torrents ought to be choice #1 in distributing files of any decent size. As an example, I thought it was utterly retarded that the recent Ubuntu 9.10 release didn't have the download torrents front and center. Why the hell not? Obviously they didn't have the bandwidth to handle all the direct downloads, as I started one just to see how slowly it would go. It crawled along at less than 1 KB/s for hours. They had the torrents advertised on the forums, at least, but they clearly made the launch harder on their servers than it should have been.
Torrents let you do more with less bandwidth. Take advantage of that! I understand some people may not be able to use them because of their ISP being a douchbag or whatever, and those people will need normal HTTP/FTP transactions and mirrors... but everyone else can use torrents and share your burden with you.
The problem is that "micro-transactions" have crept into every aspect of life.
If take the time to add up all your "buck here, buck there" transactions, you may be surprised just how much you spend.
The entire system is set up to maximize impulse buys and hide the total cost of purchases by splitting it up into bits.
People go for free because it is less than $1 or 25 cents or even 1 cent. Isn't it exactly that fact why so many things are outsourced to China, India, etc? To save just a little bit on each transaction?
It's real just the whole "pot meet kettle" issue. Everybody will go will spending as little as they can. The only difference is that businesses have an easier time making their cost cutting measures legal and those of individuals illegal, and then trying to use words like "intellectual property" and "piracy" to give a moralistic tone to the debate along with their stacked legal deck.
It's a bunch of dishonesty, ultimately, and it's obvious that lots normal people aren't convinced that this "priracy" is so terrible.. Nor should they be.
well played!