don't say it couldn't happen because it wasn't too long ago most of us would have never believed the USA would have free speech zones and rendition taxis either.
Why wouldn't they believe that? The USA is just as susceptible to corruption as any other country (provided the people aren't keeping the government in check). Actually, believing that the US government could never become corrupt probably hurt their chances of ever stopping the corruption in the first place.
I don't think he was insensitive. I think people are oversensitive.
"Wow! You said or implied something that I don't like! You must be insensitive!"
If it were a choice, then it would be a choice. No matter how insensitive you (not you, specifically) think it is for someone to bring up that possibility, it wouldn't change reality.
every argument made by copyright trolls has been to some extent if not completely refuted but they go around repeating it to people that have heard them a thousand times
What's humorous is that some of these "copyright trolls" probably feel the same way about you that you do about them.
Making money off of advertisements is just awful! No one should be allowed to do that. After all, what if someone uses your website to... infringe someone's copyright?
Well, if it's illegal in their country, and they think it's legal, then they would indeed be wrong about that. But whether it's "immoral" or not is a completely different matter.
You think all these kids with ginormous music collections would go without all their tunes?
Depends on the person. I'd bet there are quite a few people who wouldn't pay a cent. And it's not always just because they want to save money. Sometimes they simply don't have the money to begin with.
Honestly, you need to tell them that we could eliminate more terrorist scum by passing a bill that allows the government to require that security cameras be installed in everyone's homes (so that they can more effectively catch terrorists and criminals). Anyone who objects to this is obviously a criminal/terrorist (or both!). No way the government (or some of the people inside it) could be corrupt! No way mistakes could be made! Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. And it's for the children.
That's why 1/3 of the world's population today believes in God.
1/3 of the population could believe that 1 + 1 = 3. I'm not going to agree with them.
You will look at the unexplanable and say there must be some reason, even though nobody can state how it could ever be possible.
I could say that the flying spaghetti monster did it. Or something I find equally absurd. The fact that you can't explain something doesn't mean that you can say that it was caused by whatever you can come up with.
I know at least a few people who actually are anti-piracy, but even they don't feel it's any worse than jaywalking. The thing is, they don't believe that we can effectively 'stop' piracy in any way without infringing upon people's rights and giving governments/corporations power they feel they shouldn't even have. Most of the proposed 'solutions' seem to be to remove all forms of due process.
And I definitely wouldn't say that piracy is on the scale of murder or actual robbery. Although, you did have a point. The mere fact that there isn't a perfect solution probably shouldn't stop you from trying to find the solution you feel is best. But I think the problem is that they're taking the entire issue too seriously and wasting far too many tax dollars on a lost cause. In other words, take into account the severity of the action.
you should view them as an opportunity to not only try and expand your capabilities and views, but also bring a fresh perspective to those fields that may end up being of use to others.
Except that I don't want to waste a colossal amount of time memorizing (and then forgetting) things that I likely won't even need. If it turns out I need it, I'll try learning it when the time comes.
As it stands, you have to pay for all of these classes, and they use up your time. Time you could be spending to learn more about the things that are the most important to you.
I'm not very worried that there is a minuscule chance that I may need these skills, or that they'll benefit me slightly. I don't see either as a justification to force me to waste my time.
I really don't understand why anyone would buy that. "See!? Certain people are infringing upon copyright! Therefore, we have to violate your rights to stop them!"
Doesn't sound too convincing to me (whether or not some guy violates copyright to try to 'help' the cause). I certainly hope it doesn't sound convincing to anyone else, either.
Yeah, it does. Copyright infringement actually harms these companies! Money magically vanishes from their possession and is then transferred to you. Why do you think that some people say that copyright infringement is theft?
The basic problem with your analogy is that the customers own the game and are being locked out of it by the DRM. Unlike with someone choosing to lock down their own house/car, the publishers are harming the actual customers (and the customer basically has no say in the matter).
That's quite different than locking down your own property of your own volition.
If parents were responsible and acted like parents, they should tell their kids that those games are off limits.
I wish they'd stop being paranoid idiots, realize that it's unlikely that a video game will make someone violent, and then just let them play the games.
As I said, I can come up with literally any situation and apply that line of logic to it. I could even say, "If you were in a copyright infringer's situation, you'd feel differently!"
Whether they would or wouldn't feel differently means absolutely nothing. It doesn't make their current arguments right or wrong. That was my point. Not to mention the fact that they would feel differently is just an assumption.
The way he said, "and you remember back to when you thought it was OK." made me believe that he was saying that they'd change their mind if they were in a different situation. Which, again, I feel is irrelevant.
Slashdot Mirror
Who ever thought that was a good idea?
You're ignoring the spirit of the constitution (which is whatever I say it is)!
don't say it couldn't happen because it wasn't too long ago most of us would have never believed the USA would have free speech zones and rendition taxis either.
Why wouldn't they believe that? The USA is just as susceptible to corruption as any other country (provided the people aren't keeping the government in check). Actually, believing that the US government could never become corrupt probably hurt their chances of ever stopping the corruption in the first place.
And the terrorist paranoia. And the fact that it's a complete waste of money.
I don't think he was insensitive. I think people are oversensitive.
"Wow! You said or implied something that I don't like! You must be insensitive!"
If it were a choice, then it would be a choice. No matter how insensitive you (not you, specifically) think it is for someone to bring up that possibility, it wouldn't change reality.
A child is not and never will be able to provide informed consent
It might be unlikely, but I wouldn't say it's impossible. And it depends on their age.
But pedophiles aren't necessarily child molesters. I think they're hated even if they haven't and never will do anything to a child.
every argument made by copyright trolls has been to some extent if not completely refuted but they go around repeating it to people that have heard them a thousand times
What's humorous is that some of these "copyright trolls" probably feel the same way about you that you do about them.
Making money off of advertisements is just awful! No one should be allowed to do that. After all, what if someone uses your website to... infringe someone's copyright?
Well, if it's illegal in their country, and they think it's legal, then they would indeed be wrong about that. But whether it's "immoral" or not is a completely different matter.
You think all these kids with ginormous music collections would go without all their tunes?
Depends on the person. I'd bet there are quite a few people who wouldn't pay a cent. And it's not always just because they want to save money. Sometimes they simply don't have the money to begin with.
Before starting up a website, your first question to yourself should be this: "Will my website enable someone to... copy something?"
If the answer to that question is yes, cease all operations immediately. Copying will bring about the apocalypse.
"degree."
Why the quotes? They're all pieces of paper.
Honestly, you need to tell them that we could eliminate more terrorist scum by passing a bill that allows the government to require that security cameras be installed in everyone's homes (so that they can more effectively catch terrorists and criminals). Anyone who objects to this is obviously a criminal/terrorist (or both!). No way the government (or some of the people inside it) could be corrupt! No way mistakes could be made! Nothing to hide, nothing to fear. And it's for the children.
It's not about wanting to believe that. I can't simply force myself to believe in a god.
Have fun not believing in the flying spaghetti monster, then.
That's why 1/3 of the world's population today believes in God.
1/3 of the population could believe that 1 + 1 = 3. I'm not going to agree with them.
You will look at the unexplanable and say there must be some reason, even though nobody can state how it could ever be possible.
I could say that the flying spaghetti monster did it. Or something I find equally absurd. The fact that you can't explain something doesn't mean that you can say that it was caused by whatever you can come up with.
That's not an excuse for piracy either.
I believe that what is and is not a 'valid' excuse for piracy is subjective.
I know at least a few people who actually are anti-piracy, but even they don't feel it's any worse than jaywalking. The thing is, they don't believe that we can effectively 'stop' piracy in any way without infringing upon people's rights and giving governments/corporations power they feel they shouldn't even have. Most of the proposed 'solutions' seem to be to remove all forms of due process.
And I definitely wouldn't say that piracy is on the scale of murder or actual robbery. Although, you did have a point. The mere fact that there isn't a perfect solution probably shouldn't stop you from trying to find the solution you feel is best. But I think the problem is that they're taking the entire issue too seriously and wasting far too many tax dollars on a lost cause. In other words, take into account the severity of the action.
you should view them as an opportunity to not only try and expand your capabilities and views, but also bring a fresh perspective to those fields that may end up being of use to others.
Except that I don't want to waste a colossal amount of time memorizing (and then forgetting) things that I likely won't even need. If it turns out I need it, I'll try learning it when the time comes.
As it stands, you have to pay for all of these classes, and they use up your time. Time you could be spending to learn more about the things that are the most important to you.
I'm not very worried that there is a minuscule chance that I may need these skills, or that they'll benefit me slightly. I don't see either as a justification to force me to waste my time.
I really don't understand why anyone would buy that. "See!? Certain people are infringing upon copyright! Therefore, we have to violate your rights to stop them!"
Doesn't sound too convincing to me (whether or not some guy violates copyright to try to 'help' the cause). I certainly hope it doesn't sound convincing to anyone else, either.
Yeah, it does. Copyright infringement actually harms these companies! Money magically vanishes from their possession and is then transferred to you. Why do you think that some people say that copyright infringement is theft?
The basic problem with your analogy is that the customers own the game and are being locked out of it by the DRM. Unlike with someone choosing to lock down their own house/car, the publishers are harming the actual customers (and the customer basically has no say in the matter).
That's quite different than locking down your own property of your own volition.
If parents were responsible and acted like parents, they should tell their kids that those games are off limits.
I wish they'd stop being paranoid idiots, realize that it's unlikely that a video game will make someone violent, and then just let them play the games.
They gave me swats
That'll teach you not to resort to violence!
Yeah, but some people download movies on the internet, and some people's feelings get hurt occasionally.
Privacy has to go. The internet can't be the wild west!
What?
As I said, I can come up with literally any situation and apply that line of logic to it. I could even say, "If you were in a copyright infringer's situation, you'd feel differently!"
Whether they would or wouldn't feel differently means absolutely nothing. It doesn't make their current arguments right or wrong. That was my point. Not to mention the fact that they would feel differently is just an assumption.
The way he said, "and you remember back to when you thought it was OK." made me believe that he was saying that they'd change their mind if they were in a different situation. Which, again, I feel is irrelevant.