Comcast regularly sells 15/1 service for $20/month. True that goes up after a year, but then you can switch to DSL for a little less. Letting people pay $10 for 1.5/nada internet is hardly doing them a favor--and even they will have to ration their usage or risk having their account terminated for being bandwidth hogs. Not to mention the real price: the rule of law collapsing as TV/movie interests merge into a nasty monopoly controlling a huge piece of the internet market.
They are probably targeting torrents. Instead of having to go to the legal expense to sue the individuals behind the IPs that their contractors have flagged, the RIAA and the MPAA are simply paying the ISPs to terminate the accounts.
I am free to stand on a street corner and speak a series of 1s and 0s that when encoded in a computer can be interpreted as video. That does not mean linking to a copyrighted video for which I do not have the copy right is protected by free speech.
So posting the video is OK, but linking is bad because it is like driving through a farmers' market? And not everything spoken is speech, unless it can be interpreted by a computer in which case it is?
I think we could clarify things by just admitting that the courts recognize copyrights to supersede free speech.
Separate the two and the West's GDP would probably fall by 2/3. China's would fall too, but they are used to low wages and a lot worse. The West has more to lose.
Sometimes less detail is better. ASCII porn was popular back in the day and I remember idiotic strip poker on the Apple IIe back in the early 80s. But I guess having an imagination is so yesterday.
Those were stopgap measures. If you want imagination you read erotic literature--or then would you argue for less detail and prefer "See Jane Fuck" text?
Not a problem that Zuckerberg can understand since he has people to open his mail, a team of bodyguards working around the clock, and multiple gated estates with concealed ownership records. He is overdue for a pie in the face.
The international police response seems to indicate that this type of internet action is pretty powerful. You are basically arguing that guerrillas are cowardly for not lining up in plain view to be mowed down by the establishment's enormous stockpiled wealth and materiel. Even the President of United States is never more powerful than when he is in his basement bunker.
A verdict of "treason" can only be determined by a court of law. The US had opportunities to arrest al-Awlaki, but its objection to him is his ideological teachings, which aren't grounds for conviction, so it put a mafia-style hit out to shut him up. It did the same thing with bin Laden in the 90s, and certainly no good came of that--for Americans at least
Censorship that follows the "right procedure" is still censorship. Watch Sophie Scholl to see what "legal scrutiny" is worth in a country without basic rights.
Your local newspaper site only attracts trolls because that is all it's good for. Moderation or identity verification would reduce the comments to 0 (or 1) . Conversely, pseudonyms reduce the usefulness of a social network site, but I doubt allowing the option would cause as much trouble as you think.
Sounds like a typical conservative Christian politician to me, though he is actually sincere. Looks like Norway's political culture of child indoctrination was successful.
Pretty awkward convicting a black for racist speech against whites though. Or against blacks for that matter, since a lot of rap music talks about shooting niggas. The Kingdom of England is also pretty much the first modern totalitarian state in the west, so it is not much of a democratic counter-example to the simple-minded and backwards USA.
They either don't know better. A lot of people also don't take movies too seriously, particularly streaming movies, and play them while they are doing something else. Netflix seemed eager to increase quality, however, with the CEO even mentioning 4K, but with bandwidth caps and other pressure from ISPs that possibility will be lost to history.
And how does that rich person hurt the poor by getting richer?
Everyone who wants tax cuts seems to always want to pay for them by eliminating Medicare, Social Security, the minimum wage etc. Wealth is supposedly created somehow, but most of the time it looks like a zero-sum game with the rich taking from everyone else.
Professional killers may be nice people, but when they are "on the job" and you are classified as "potentially hostile", it is not irrational to feel uncomfortable.
All torrent sites are targets anyway, so it's best to turn the bow into the storm. Unless TPB removes un-pirated content it, like every torrent site, isn't "meant" for anything.
Slashdot Mirror
Comcast regularly sells 15/1 service for $20/month. True that goes up after a year, but then you can switch to DSL for a little less. Letting people pay $10 for 1.5/nada internet is hardly doing them a favor--and even they will have to ration their usage or risk having their account terminated for being bandwidth hogs. Not to mention the real price: the rule of law collapsing as TV/movie interests merge into a nasty monopoly controlling a huge piece of the internet market.
They are probably targeting torrents. Instead of having to go to the legal expense to sue the individuals behind the IPs that their contractors have flagged, the RIAA and the MPAA are simply paying the ISPs to terminate the accounts.
I am free to stand on a street corner and speak a series of 1s and 0s that when encoded in a computer can be interpreted as video. That does not mean linking to a copyrighted video for which I do not have the copy right is protected by free speech.
So posting the video is OK, but linking is bad because it is like driving through a farmers' market? And not everything spoken is speech, unless it can be interpreted by a computer in which case it is? I think we could clarify things by just admitting that the courts recognize copyrights to supersede free speech.
Separate the two and the West's GDP would probably fall by 2/3. China's would fall too, but they are used to low wages and a lot worse. The West has more to lose.
Sometimes less detail is better. ASCII porn was popular back in the day and I remember idiotic strip poker on the Apple IIe back in the early 80s. But I guess having an imagination is so yesterday.
Those were stopgap measures. If you want imagination you read erotic literature--or then would you argue for less detail and prefer "See Jane Fuck" text?
Not a problem that Zuckerberg can understand since he has people to open his mail, a team of bodyguards working around the clock, and multiple gated estates with concealed ownership records. He is overdue for a pie in the face.
So you wouldn't see a problem if libraries were closed down by the government?
The international police response seems to indicate that this type of internet action is pretty powerful. You are basically arguing that guerrillas are cowardly for not lining up in plain view to be mowed down by the establishment's enormous stockpiled wealth and materiel. Even the President of United States is never more powerful than when he is in his basement bunker.
A verdict of "treason" can only be determined by a court of law. The US had opportunities to arrest al-Awlaki, but its objection to him is his ideological teachings, which aren't grounds for conviction, so it put a mafia-style hit out to shut him up. It did the same thing with bin Laden in the 90s, and certainly no good came of that--for Americans at least
Politicians are cheap to bribe, and your life is shaped significantly by regulations written by various special interests.
Censorship that follows the "right procedure" is still censorship. Watch Sophie Scholl to see what "legal scrutiny" is worth in a country without basic rights.
Seems like clever strategy to get rescued if you find yourself stranded on an island.
Your local newspaper site only attracts trolls because that is all it's good for. Moderation or identity verification would reduce the comments to 0 (or 1) . Conversely, pseudonyms reduce the usefulness of a social network site, but I doubt allowing the option would cause as much trouble as you think.
Brain also is probably advising you to neither fuck nor eat the defective/diseased creature, and to keep it away from your family.
Just leaving your house is a huge privacy risk, but generally we expect people not to be creepy.
Sounds like a typical conservative Christian politician to me, though he is actually sincere. Looks like Norway's political culture of child indoctrination was successful.
He probably didn't clear all that much after everything was converted to cash and the money was split with his associates.
Pretty awkward convicting a black for racist speech against whites though. Or against blacks for that matter, since a lot of rap music talks about shooting niggas. The Kingdom of England is also pretty much the first modern totalitarian state in the west, so it is not much of a democratic counter-example to the simple-minded and backwards USA.
Seems better than common choices like Madison Mackenzie or Riley.
They either don't know better. A lot of people also don't take movies too seriously, particularly streaming movies, and play them while they are doing something else. Netflix seemed eager to increase quality, however, with the CEO even mentioning 4K, but with bandwidth caps and other pressure from ISPs that possibility will be lost to history.
Pretty much guaranteed to spread as the manufacturer's lobbyists push politicians' buttons.
And how does that rich person hurt the poor by getting richer?
Everyone who wants tax cuts seems to always want to pay for them by eliminating Medicare, Social Security, the minimum wage etc. Wealth is supposedly created somehow, but most of the time it looks like a zero-sum game with the rich taking from everyone else.
You seem have some phobias and prejudices.
Professional killers may be nice people, but when they are "on the job" and you are classified as "potentially hostile", it is not irrational to feel uncomfortable.
All torrent sites are targets anyway, so it's best to turn the bow into the storm. Unless TPB removes un-pirated content it, like every torrent site, isn't "meant" for anything.
Clearly the government needs to protect the population by blocking those websites too.