Are the media so naive that they don't understand how the appeal process happens?
Exactly. The media seems to have already convicted them, even before the appeal process has been completed. If the TPB gang manages to get exonerated, it'll just be mentioned in small print somewhere and the public will be left with a conception that the industry won - don't fuck with them.
1. TPB exists primarily to facilitate copyright violation. Google is a common carrier.
That you think TPB exists primarily to facilitate copyright violation is your interpretation of what TPB exists for. If TPB facilitates copyright violation, it is due to the actions of its users, just as Google's data caching is due to the actions of its search routines.
Alright, so Google has a lot less links to controversial content than TPB. Let me then ask you, would TPB be exonerated if they started linking to non-copyrighted content, and if so, how many such links would it need to have in order to attain the status of a "common carrier" such as Google? Surely you must agree that if we draw a line here it is going to be a very arbitrary one.
2. TPB hosts the BitTorrent tracker files. Google does not.
Trackers and.torrent files indeed do facilitate file sharing, illegal or otherwise, but do not in themselves contain copyrighted material. Trackers provide the means for sharing of material, but so does Google's filetype:torrent search. Google, on the other hand, contains loads of copyrighted material in the form of cached content, yet few have a problem with this.
To some this might seem like nitpicking, but the distinction really isn't clear-cut here. We can't say that TPB is illegal and Google is not, and just use a plea to so-called common sense. Easy arguments such as "but TPB link to more illegal files" or "they have a Pirate in their name for chrissakes" just don't cut it here.
Maybe no one has read it. In Odyssey 3001 (The Final Odyssey) Clarke wrote about a sulfur-based life forms on Jupiter's Europa moon.
This particular microbe, however, is not sulfur-based. "Sulfur-based" would indicate that its molecules are largely built out of sulfur (as ours are of carbon), whereas these microbes only utilize sulfur in their energy production.
If these living creatures are harmful to plants, animals, or the other living creatures we depend on, then it's probably a no-go.
This is extremely unlikely. For a microbe to be able to live within another organism, it would have to have gone through generations and generations of mutation-driven evolution so that it would not be instantly killed by its host's immune system.
Don't get me wrong, if it comes down to it I'll be sure to pitch in and donate. But if the verdict stands and we'll end up footing the bill (which countless TPB users no doubt will), the industry cronies will not only have won, they'll have picked our pockets doing it.
About learning and adaptation... Just making a network of interconnected transistors and capacitors doesn't enable a machine to learn much, if proper mechanisms for synaptic plasticity don't exist. In other words, there has to be a way for new synapses to form and old ones to die out in order for it to function anything like a human brain does.
A question from someone with limited knowledge of the American health system - how much information do your insurance companies get? I mean, they must have access to critical medical info if they are to pay for procedures, drugs and such.
Real muscles contract by myofilaments sliding past each other, shortening the overall length of the muscle. In this case no sliding past occurs, and the overall length of the nanotube "muscle" doesn't diminish, so I can't see how this technology could be used to replace actual muscles.
I began to doubt the whole "change" thing back when Obama started to stack his administration with people from Clinton's and even Bush's administration. I guess change is a relative thing.
Gee, why not become unemployed today? Why waste all that energy working when you've got such a cushy hammock made out of safety net to relax in?
Because the system doesn't support itself, and most citizens realize this. The dough's gotta come from somewhere. In addition, the welfare benefits don't provide for a high-class living, just enough to get by. On the top of that, most people like working. Most enjoy the independence of being able to sustain themselves with the work they do, and not having to rely on someone else. Not everyone has this luxury, as the thousands that have recently been laid off here can attest.
I live in Finland, and I generally don't have a beef with the gov't taking a substantial proportion of my income. Sure, part of it goes to things I think we could live without (new helicopters for the military, construction of music halls, etc). However, knowing that my taxes are used to support things such as basic infrastructure, the social security system and universal healthcare, makes me happy to be able to pay them. Because who knows, maybe someday I'll find myself unemployed, without an income, and relying on that safety net I've helped uphold.
Slashdot Mirror
Are the media so naive that they don't understand how the appeal process happens?
Exactly. The media seems to have already convicted them, even before the appeal process has been completed. If the TPB gang manages to get exonerated, it'll just be mentioned in small print somewhere and the public will be left with a conception that the industry won - don't fuck with them.
1. TPB exists primarily to facilitate copyright violation. Google is a common carrier.
That you think TPB exists primarily to facilitate copyright violation is your interpretation of what TPB exists for. If TPB facilitates copyright violation, it is due to the actions of its users, just as Google's data caching is due to the actions of its search routines.
Alright, so Google has a lot less links to controversial content than TPB. Let me then ask you, would TPB be exonerated if they started linking to non-copyrighted content, and if so, how many such links would it need to have in order to attain the status of a "common carrier" such as Google? Surely you must agree that if we draw a line here it is going to be a very arbitrary one.
2. TPB hosts the BitTorrent tracker files. Google does not.
Trackers and .torrent files indeed do facilitate file sharing, illegal or otherwise, but do not in themselves contain copyrighted material. Trackers provide the means for sharing of material, but so does Google's filetype:torrent search. Google, on the other hand, contains loads of copyrighted material in the form of cached content, yet few have a problem with this.
To some this might seem like nitpicking, but the distinction really isn't clear-cut here. We can't say that TPB is illegal and Google is not, and just use a plea to so-called common sense. Easy arguments such as "but TPB link to more illegal files" or "they have a Pirate in their name for chrissakes" just don't cut it here.
Maybe no one has read it. In Odyssey 3001 (The Final Odyssey) Clarke wrote about a sulfur-based life forms on Jupiter's Europa moon.
This particular microbe, however, is not sulfur-based. "Sulfur-based" would indicate that its molecules are largely built out of sulfur (as ours are of carbon), whereas these microbes only utilize sulfur in their energy production.
If these living creatures are harmful to plants, animals, or the other living creatures we depend on, then it's probably a no-go.
This is extremely unlikely. For a microbe to be able to live within another organism, it would have to have gone through generations and generations of mutation-driven evolution so that it would not be instantly killed by its host's immune system.
Don't get me wrong, if it comes down to it I'll be sure to pitch in and donate. But if the verdict stands and we'll end up footing the bill (which countless TPB users no doubt will), the industry cronies will not only have won, they'll have picked our pockets doing it.
2- Where can we donate to help pay the fine?
You really want to subsidize the recording and movie industries with your money?
About learning and adaptation... Just making a network of interconnected transistors and capacitors doesn't enable a machine to learn much, if proper mechanisms for synaptic plasticity don't exist. In other words, there has to be a way for new synapses to form and old ones to die out in order for it to function anything like a human brain does.
A question from someone with limited knowledge of the American health system - how much information do your insurance companies get? I mean, they must have access to critical medical info if they are to pay for procedures, drugs and such.
Real muscles contract by myofilaments sliding past each other, shortening the overall length of the muscle. In this case no sliding past occurs, and the overall length of the nanotube "muscle" doesn't diminish, so I can't see how this technology could be used to replace actual muscles.
I began to doubt the whole "change" thing back when Obama started to stack his administration with people from Clinton's and even Bush's administration. I guess change is a relative thing.
Gee, why not become unemployed today? Why waste all that energy working when you've got such a cushy hammock made out of safety net to relax in?
Because the system doesn't support itself, and most citizens realize this. The dough's gotta come from somewhere. In addition, the welfare benefits don't provide for a high-class living, just enough to get by. On the top of that, most people like working. Most enjoy the independence of being able to sustain themselves with the work they do, and not having to rely on someone else. Not everyone has this luxury, as the thousands that have recently been laid off here can attest.
I live in Finland, and I generally don't have a beef with the gov't taking a substantial proportion of my income. Sure, part of it goes to things I think we could live without (new helicopters for the military, construction of music halls, etc). However, knowing that my taxes are used to support things such as basic infrastructure, the social security system and universal healthcare, makes me happy to be able to pay them. Because who knows, maybe someday I'll find myself unemployed, without an income, and relying on that safety net I've helped uphold.