Those very same corporations who will act in the worst possible fashion to make a buck (stuff like selling AIDS-tainted medicine so as not to lose money on it).
I would be very interested to see a reference to this. Thanks.
I agree completely about the analogy to Prohibition.
I don't believe close to 100% of the conspiracy theories I invent and disseminate. It's just a thought experiment, which sometimes serves a direct purpose but is generally just exercising the gray matter.
And, to your government, both of those activities are not equally immoral.
Steal a CD, get a small fine and perhaps a short jail stay. A recent copyright bill suggests 10 year prison terms for attempting to download a movie (i.e., not even fully committing the crime!).
Someone on Digg suggested murdering the person who is about to turn you in for copyright violation, as that only carries a 5 year prison sentence.
Back in merry old England, pickpockets were put to death if convicted. This only served to turn them into murdering pickpockets, as they were less likely to be identified.
Please include all media in this law, not just media playable by certain pieces of hardware using certain wired or wireless devices.
Movies, music, and books should also be banned due to this law. Most especially, the Bible, which contains many scenes of both debauchery and violence: hedonistic practices, fathers killing sons because of voices in their heads, entire cities being leveled due to a bet ("for the usual amount") between two make-believe parties, etc.
As to your sig, I started to read it as part of your comment and got "If you can't convince them, convict them" before I saw it correctly.
You're right; the ESRB must not be doing as good a job as it should for this to be necessary. (Or perhaps, it has received "recommendations" to do a bad job, to cause this to be necessary.)
Okay, how about this one: are you upset that my library (1) rents compact discs, and (2) has a pay-per-hour computer with a CD burner and convenient $0.25 blank CDs?
All this screaming about "ripping people off" only serves to clue the people in to how they're being ripped off. $20 CDs after being told that after a few years the cost of the new factories would be paid and the price would be lowered; copyright being retroactively extended so that authors who made a contract with the public that their works would enter the public domain at a specific point years after they wrote their works, are able to break that contract and reap the rewards of breaking it while receiving none of the penalties that a contract breaker generally gets (although it's not really spelled out in the contract what happens when the producer breaks their end of the bargain, since it was inconceivable to the country's founders that producers would have the incentive or the ability to break the contract by usurping the government).
Yeah, it's a fair balance all right. Excuse me while I vomit.
And don't tell me physical items can't be copied; they already can, just with less precision and greater expense. In the future they will be able to be copied with exact presicion, for almost no expense.
Will you then pull the "angry man yells at cloud" stance and say the people in Africa should be starving, that copying food for them is taking money away from farmers?
Ah, but they don't have scales in the chairs to detect bathroom/kitchen breaks; they don't have cameras to detect when people have fallen asleep; they don't have microphones to detect when people hit MUTE on their TV (perhaps the cable remote could tell them, but there's a TV mute as well).
They're going to need a lot more help from AT&T if they're going to see this through.
The bad part is that someone have DoS:ed the Swedish police's website, which has been giving the pirates a really bad name, and has made the "threat" of these sort of attacks against the government and media the latest target of media fearmongering.
Nice synchronicity. I'm currently listening to the song in my sig (it's on Good For Your Soul, and no it's not on repeat;-), and I see your comment.
After watching The Nightmare Before Christmas, and learning Danny Elfman was involved, I ran out and bought all the Oingo Boingo albums (like 12 years ago, I think). I wasn't disappointed.
What's interesting is there are now plenty of other sites that something like this could park at: Slashdot (not so easy since articles keep flowing off the main page, but create the user "VolpeSucks" and then keep a journal); Wikipedia or any of a number of other wikis (could create pages for Volpe and his campaign and contributions including ones that were returned).
Side note, why does returning a contribution absolve the candidate of guilt? (One can't just take the candy bar back to the store one stole it from.)
The wiki should also have as much information about the process as possible. This will serve three benefits:
It will expose these practices, which may help them to change; it will expose as much as possible the participants (I want the names of the people who made the decisions at the governing body that pulled the plug, if possible).
It will allow other groups to help prevent this from happening to them in the future, by providing a roadmap to avoid the land mines.
It will provide a roadmap for planting land mines, so that other groups can go on the offensive against these criminals, if necessary. (This may also help effect change in the rules as well.)
What to you appears reckless, is to me simply paying attention to higher functions.
Sounds like you may want to investigate replacement organs before you turn 26.
The pharmaceutical industry is amoral; they move according to what's profitable. Curing diseases which have few victims, or which can be cured with simple remedies, are not profitable. Therefore you will learn about these cures only on the Internet.
My stance consists entirely of generalizations (if the rule only works for me then it's not much of a rule).
And, who the FUCK are you to tell me what limits should be placed on my survival!?!??!?
Due process is not a mere annoyance, nor is the right to confront your accusers [...]
Sadly, the latter right is pretty much gone thanks to laws like RICO that encourage anonymous tips.
Why are anonymous tips required? Because the punishment is generally far out of line with the behavior, so the punished feels the need for "revenge". Selling pot is not harming anyone (some drug dealers turn to violence because they cannot get restitution from the courts; however, it is a true statement that less than 100% of drug dealers resort to violence as a method of conflict resolution).
So if your neighbor turns you in for selling pot, you will never face your accuser. This is a disgrace; free speech does not mean freedom from consequences. A nosy neighbor should have to weigh the consequences of retribution in their mind before picking up the phone and butt-raping their neighbor (figuratively, and ultimately, literally, albeit with someone else's equipment).
Slashdot Mirror
Should singles who deliberately choose that lifestyle to be frugal receive less benefits?
I would be very interested to see a reference to this. Thanks.
I agree completely about the analogy to Prohibition.
You're welcome on your sig. ;-)
Steal a CD, get a small fine and perhaps a short jail stay. A recent copyright bill suggests 10 year prison terms for attempting to download a movie (i.e., not even fully committing the crime!).
Someone on Digg suggested murdering the person who is about to turn you in for copyright violation, as that only carries a 5 year prison sentence.
Back in merry old England, pickpockets were put to death if convicted. This only served to turn them into murdering pickpockets, as they were less likely to be identified.
That's not true... Nobody will buy cigarettes for my poor cousin Richard.
Please include all media in this law, not just media playable by certain pieces of hardware using certain wired or wireless devices.
Movies, music, and books should also be banned due to this law. Most especially, the Bible, which contains many scenes of both debauchery and violence: hedonistic practices, fathers killing sons because of voices in their heads, entire cities being leveled due to a bet ("for the usual amount") between two make-believe parties, etc.
As to your sig, I started to read it as part of your comment and got "If you can't convince them, convict them" before I saw it correctly.
You're right; the ESRB must not be doing as good a job as it should for this to be necessary. (Or perhaps, it has received "recommendations" to do a bad job, to cause this to be necessary.)
All this screaming about "ripping people off" only serves to clue the people in to how they're being ripped off. $20 CDs after being told that after a few years the cost of the new factories would be paid and the price would be lowered; copyright being retroactively extended so that authors who made a contract with the public that their works would enter the public domain at a specific point years after they wrote their works, are able to break that contract and reap the rewards of breaking it while receiving none of the penalties that a contract breaker generally gets (although it's not really spelled out in the contract what happens when the producer breaks their end of the bargain, since it was inconceivable to the country's founders that producers would have the incentive or the ability to break the contract by usurping the government).
Yeah, it's a fair balance all right. Excuse me while I vomit.
And don't tell me physical items can't be copied; they already can, just with less precision and greater expense. In the future they will be able to be copied with exact presicion, for almost no expense.
Will you then pull the "angry man yells at cloud" stance and say the people in Africa should be starving, that copying food for them is taking money away from farmers?
They're going to need a lot more help from AT&T if they're going to see this through.
Likely it was the MPAA, as a diversionary tactic.
I remember Buckner and Garcia, myself. ;-)
After watching The Nightmare Before Christmas, and learning Danny Elfman was involved, I ran out and bought all the Oingo Boingo albums (like 12 years ago, I think). I wasn't disappointed.
Spirituality is wonderful, and gets you closer to God/creator/yourself.
Religion separates the masses from their money. Tax free!
The First Church of Appliantology was invented for this reason...
Now I spend more time gaming and reading, and watch close to zero TV and movies.
Not saying it'll work for everyone, or even for me forever, but it's a refreshing change.
Side note, why does returning a contribution absolve the candidate of guilt? (One can't just take the candy bar back to the store one stole it from.)
The wiki should also have as much information about the process as possible. This will serve three benefits:
Not so funny to hear "In Soviet Amerika" though, and realize the truth of it.
Send ... more ... paramedics!
Of course, holding his Bible to the same standards would get it banned, so we can't do that.
"A moose bit my sister once?"
Sounds like you may want to investigate replacement organs before you turn 26.
The pharmaceutical industry is amoral; they move according to what's profitable. Curing diseases which have few victims, or which can be cured with simple remedies, are not profitable. Therefore you will learn about these cures only on the Internet.
My stance consists entirely of generalizations (if the rule only works for me then it's not much of a rule).
And, who the FUCK are you to tell me what limits should be placed on my survival!?!??!?
Yes, because I'm the one marrying a million chicks a year.
That's really weird thinking, there. "I want to be more like this fool who rushed into my sword?"
Yes, yes you are. You're saying the individual is worthless and we should let genetics run its course.
Sorry, I'm the most important thing in my world and if I need stem cells in order to not die, I'm going after them.
2. Poke your eye out.
Damn, now I'm liable for your actions.
What?
Sadly, the latter right is pretty much gone thanks to laws like RICO that encourage anonymous tips.
Why are anonymous tips required? Because the punishment is generally far out of line with the behavior, so the punished feels the need for "revenge". Selling pot is not harming anyone (some drug dealers turn to violence because they cannot get restitution from the courts; however, it is a true statement that less than 100% of drug dealers resort to violence as a method of conflict resolution).
So if your neighbor turns you in for selling pot, you will never face your accuser. This is a disgrace; free speech does not mean freedom from consequences. A nosy neighbor should have to weigh the consequences of retribution in their mind before picking up the phone and butt-raping their neighbor (figuratively, and ultimately, literally, albeit with someone else's equipment).
I'd say, contrarily, marriages come and go. Opportunity may not knock more than once.
(And, children change the equation.)