Fool. That candy bar has a real cost that causes a real loss to the 7-11 owner and the maker of the candy bar. COPYING a song on the internet does not as it DEPRIVES NOTHING.
It isn't so much a sense of entitlement, as knowing that making one more digital copy won't hurt the authors of the work. I guess it is no worse in my mind of taking a photo of a peice of art instead of buying a postcard from the giftshop. Currently, I simply can't pay for Fallout 3, If I had more income, then I would pay for it and probably not use the purchased product at all, due to securom and similar crap.
a) I talked specifically about people who could/would not buy the content in the first palce, not people who were just cheap. b) It is not stealing, at all.
Not really. There is no harm done by me downloading things., and I am upfront about my reasons. There is an awful lot of harm caused by content owners whose only reason is greed, and they say otherwise. That's the distinction.
I agree with what you wrote, the problem is of course that the government currently grants an unreasonable amount of power/rights to copyright holders. Until that is fixed, such silly laws that allow for millions in damages for sharing a few songs should be rightfully ignored and broken.
When a law makes illegal something that a significant number of people do and don't see as wrong, that is a problem with the law, not the people breaking it. Indeed, such laws should continue to be broken.
At the most it could be immoral, although sharing things for people who may not be able to afford it otherwise would hardly seem so.
I paid to see about 3 movies in the cinema last year, and only two this year. The rest simply don't seem worthy of risking a $10 movie ticket, considering I don't have a disposable income.
I downloaded about 100 over the last two years however, and got some enjoyment from them. I would not be able to pay for the DVD's, and rentals are not a realistic option for me.
Likewise games. In the last 2 years I played Batman:Arkham Asylum which was horribly disappointing, MW2 which was fun but I finished it in about 5 hours, and don't care about multiplayer, Bioschock, which I thought was horribly overrated, Medal of Honor which was shorter than MW2, but without any redeeming features, and Fallout 3 and Fallout 3 NV. Out of those games the Fallout 3 games are the only ones I would pay for, but I still can't afford it. Even if I did pay for them, I would probably throw the game out, as the pirated versions are so much more convenient and bug free.
Given how well the content industries are doing financially, all the hubbub against copyright infringers just smacks of greed, and nothing else.
Actually, just to point out that as an Australian, being from part of the Commonwealth, he actually does have some special rights. Also to point out that as far as crimincal persecution, EU citizens have no rights that non citizens, except not to be deported.
Well, he has a point. If there was no violence and the women were fully conscious and able, why didn't they try to shove him off or leave? If he resisted then that is clearly rape, but from what you have described if they were just saying no stop with no effort made to stop, that could be mistaken as being in the throes of passion.
Under what authority can the federal government do this without a warrant? The commerce clause? What about the fact that torrent sites and files don't actually host the infringing content. Is that not protected via caselaw somewhere?
Actually, digging a bit further, and eliminate all the other people with your name (musicians, reporters, AIDS societies fellows etc), I find you on several forums, where you have been banned. Makes sense that you would come to the last refuge on the internet where you can't get banned. You have helped me cement your status as an ignorant troll who lies about his/her own accomplishments. Good job kiddo.
I give up...you really don't have any idea what you're talking about, and that joke a reply just shows it. I replied in good faith...and get religious shit in response. Best o luck dude. You're an idiot. (note, not an ad hominem, not dismissing you reply because I consider you an idiot, calling you an idiot as a consequence).
LMAO, wtf? Look at my initials, & look here then (as to academia, where I was a letter winner for a national champ in lacrosse, & also a graduate with a B.S. degree in the sciences):
I can not see any name on that list that matches the initials APK. If I don't know your name, then I can not verify anything you say, regardless of who you give me as a reference.
Also, let me explain why I believe you misconstrue the 3 things you keep relying on for proof.
Oliver Days article. He talks about using a HOSTS file as a WHITELIST, and even then admits it has problems. You misconstrue him as advocating a HOSTS file as a BLACKLIST, which is false. Furthermore, he states he was using this back in 2004 to stop ads and tracking, something adblock plus is now far more efficient at.
The Kaminsky bug. This is no longer relevant, as ALL versions of DNS servers have been patched. I guess it's possible some idiots are running an unpatched server, but that is unlikely. It is also why there has not been an attack using the Kaminsky bug since 2008 or so.
The Secunia Hijacking. This was the result of someone breaking into the registrars account and modifying the DNS records directly. DNSSEC would not have helped here since they would have had access to the proper cert. If you used Secunia regularly and wanted to add it as a whitelist in your HOSTS file then yes, that would have prevented you having to see the redirected page for a few hours. It certainly isn't an argument to use HOSTS files in the way you advocate.
We can't verify anything you say, as with out an account or given name we have nothing to check it against
No where in my previous post did I use an ad hominem attack. I guess you don't know what that actually is.
You have not answered any of my questions
Given your trollish behavior, i.e. stalking and insulting, you are clearly a troll. (note, that is also not an ad hominem attack). Given the way you obsessively stalk people, redundantly quote information and your strange use of quotes, I would say you also have some serious issues.
Computing just isn't your field kiddo, but I do hope you get the help you need. I won't be replying to you further until you answer my original questions in a polite manner.
Slashdot Mirror
who rated this troll +5?
username girlintraining, and you think it's a guy?
Batman was disappointing because ti was short and repetitive, and the storyline was boring. I could glide fine in my pirated version.
A few thousand college students is not a significant number. Hundreds of thousands is.
Fool. That candy bar has a real cost that causes a real loss to the 7-11 owner and the maker of the candy bar. COPYING a song on the internet does not as it DEPRIVES NOTHING.
It isn't so much a sense of entitlement, as knowing that making one more digital copy won't hurt the authors of the work. I guess it is no worse in my mind of taking a photo of a peice of art instead of buying a postcard from the giftshop. Currently, I simply can't pay for Fallout 3, If I had more income, then I would pay for it and probably not use the purchased product at all, due to securom and similar crap.
a) I talked specifically about people who could/would not buy the content in the first palce, not people who were just cheap. b) It is not stealing, at all.
Not really. There is no harm done by me downloading things., and I am upfront about my reasons. There is an awful lot of harm caused by content owners whose only reason is greed, and they say otherwise. That's the distinction.
I agree with what you wrote, the problem is of course that the government currently grants an unreasonable amount of power/rights to copyright holders. Until that is fixed, such silly laws that allow for millions in damages for sharing a few songs should be rightfully ignored and broken.
Unlike XKCD, this IT crowd clip is actually obligatory.
When a law makes illegal something that a significant number of people do and don't see as wrong, that is a problem with the law, not the people breaking it. Indeed, such laws should continue to be broken.
At the most it could be immoral, although sharing things for people who may not be able to afford it otherwise would hardly seem so.
I paid to see about 3 movies in the cinema last year, and only two this year. The rest simply don't seem worthy of risking a $10 movie ticket, considering I don't have a disposable income.
I downloaded about 100 over the last two years however, and got some enjoyment from them. I would not be able to pay for the DVD's, and rentals are not a realistic option for me.
Likewise games. In the last 2 years I played Batman:Arkham Asylum which was horribly disappointing, MW2 which was fun but I finished it in about 5 hours, and don't care about multiplayer, Bioschock, which I thought was horribly overrated, Medal of Honor which was shorter than MW2, but without any redeeming features, and Fallout 3 and Fallout 3 NV. Out of those games the Fallout 3 games are the only ones I would pay for, but I still can't afford it. Even if I did pay for them, I would probably throw the game out, as the pirated versions are so much more convenient and bug free.
Given how well the content industries are doing financially, all the hubbub against copyright infringers just smacks of greed, and nothing else.
Actually, just to point out that as an Australian, being from part of the Commonwealth, he actually does have some special rights. Also to point out that as far as crimincal persecution, EU citizens have no rights that non citizens, except not to be deported.
Well, he has a point. If there was no violence and the women were fully conscious and able, why didn't they try to shove him off or leave? If he resisted then that is clearly rape, but from what you have described if they were just saying no stop with no effort made to stop, that could be mistaken as being in the throes of passion.
The guy revolutionized pop, and music videos. Overrated or not.
beep
Under what authority can the federal government do this without a warrant? The commerce clause? What about the fact that torrent sites and files don't actually host the infringing content. Is that not protected via caselaw somewhere?
OK, final post and no more googling. For anyone sad enough to be reading this, this post discredits APK basically completely. http://tech.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1300193&cid=28673669
Actually, digging a bit further, and eliminate all the other people with your name (musicians, reporters, AIDS societies fellows etc), I find you on several forums, where you have been banned. Makes sense that you would come to the last refuge on the internet where you can't get banned. You have helped me cement your status as an ignorant troll who lies about his/her own accomplishments. Good job kiddo.
OK, Alex Kowalski. Awesome.
Funny when I search your name of Google, I find absolutely nothing of prominence. Maybe in the next life, kid.
I give up...you really don't have any idea what you're talking about, and that joke a reply just shows it. I replied in good faith...and get religious shit in response. Best o luck dude. You're an idiot. (note, not an ad hominem, not dismissing you reply because I consider you an idiot, calling you an idiot as a consequence).
Instead of these stories being posted when they actually happened and were submitted, we get them into one aggregated post weeks later. Sigh.
Then the editorial is oddly US bashing when most of the cables actually show the US acting responsibly, or at least not worse than any other country.
LMAO, wtf? Look at my initials, & look here then (as to academia, where I was a letter winner for a national champ in lacrosse, & also a graduate with a B.S. degree in the sciences):
http://lemoynedolphins.com/sports/mlax/history/mlaxletterwinners
I can not see any name on that list that matches the initials APK. If I don't know your name, then I can not verify anything you say, regardless of who you give me as a reference.
Also, let me explain why I believe you misconstrue the 3 things you keep relying on for proof.
Given your trollish behavior, i.e. stalking and insulting, you are clearly a troll. (note, that is also not an ad hominem attack). Given the way you obsessively stalk people, redundantly quote information and your strange use of quotes, I would say you also have some serious issues.
Computing just isn't your field kiddo, but I do hope you get the help you need. I won't be replying to you further until you answer my original questions in a polite manner.