When you make an analogy, you aren't necessarily saying, "X is the same as Y in all possible ways." You could be saying, "X is the same as Y in one or more ways."
How do you know he isn't doing both? Not buying or paying any attention to the garbage they produce is also a good method. Just make sure to convince others to do the same (which I try to do).
But at the same time, it also expects websites to comply with DMCA takedown requests. Some websites seem to have found that they can't comply with all of them, so automated systems are born. These automated systems are far from perfect, and remove content not violating any copyright. The DMCA just allows supposed copyright holders to shoot a takedown letter first and ask questions later.
Waste more taxpayer dollars shutting down things that innocents use so that we can gain absolutely nothing. Why? Because people are copying data! The horror!
I also said that it was subjective. Which it is. What is and is not good writing is up for the individual to decide. You can tell someone your opinion, but that is all. Saying that reusing words is somehow "wrong" is just your own opinion.
Yes, they will. You can already see this with music, software, and various other things. He said no new content will be created.
So, why not you?
1) Irrelevant. 2) Why not? Did you assume that I wasn't a creator?
There are things that simply can not be free
Sure they can. It might be unlikely, but it is 100% within the realm of possibility.
Free Skyrim? No way.
He didn't mention Skyrim anywhere. He simply said no new content. That implies none at all. That's what I replied to, and somehow you thought I was talking about AAA games.
What? They sell premium accounts, not copyrighted work. Should every site on the internet (or at least ones with ads/premium accounts) be shut down merely because there's a chance that there could be copyrighted work there?
As a creator I'll tell you now if you give all the profits to groups like Rapidshare then there will be no new content.
No new content at all? You're not the only creator in the world, you know. Not everyone does it for money. Just because you claim to be a creator doesn't mean your words are the be-all end-all of the debate.
But here's the thing: their demands never stop. It's impossible to police all the content, and even their current policies are bound to affect innocent users. They shouldn't be forced to scour warez sites just to make sure no one is copying anyone's precious, precious data. Even that is too much to expect. And if it's automated, it's bound to hurt innocents.
Why do we let educational institutions try unproven techniques on our children?
Maybe it's the same reason we've let the current educational system, designed to churn out obedient factory workers, destroy our children's education. Apathy.
And what exactly is wrong with that? I could see it being a problem if they were a child molester, but those two aren't the same thing. Merely being a pedophile is not illegal. Not until we've criminalized thought crimes, of course.
and see if they and their children develop "problems" as that is unethical.
If only they could find some way to do it to animals belonging to another species! That would make it objectively okay because humans are objectively more important.
not as a swear word directed at somebody or something.
I don't really care if it was directed at someone. What happened? Why do some people seem to have this mentality that someone getting offended will bring about the apocalypse?
It's not just the fact that he was punished for posting something that makes it seem idiotic to me. It's the fact that their reasons are always extremely petty. "Profanity." "Swear words." "Someone could get offended!"
Who cares? Are you seriously so oversensitive that you cannot handle the mere mention of a word?
Maybe it is their network, but that doesn't make it seem any less idiotic to me. What are they, oversensitive two year olds? Profanity!? Dirty words!? It's the apocalypse!
Slashdot Mirror
When you make an analogy, you aren't necessarily saying, "X is the same as Y in all possible ways." You could be saying, "X is the same as Y in one or more ways."
So no, that's probably not what he was saying.
Huh? Why can't you do both?
How do you know he isn't doing both? Not buying or paying any attention to the garbage they produce is also a good method. Just make sure to convince others to do the same (which I try to do).
Then just get rid of the internet. Someone could use it to infringe upon someone's copyright (Oh, the horror!), after all!
DMCA provided fair harbor
But at the same time, it also expects websites to comply with DMCA takedown requests. Some websites seem to have found that they can't comply with all of them, so automated systems are born. These automated systems are far from perfect, and remove content not violating any copyright. The DMCA just allows supposed copyright holders to shoot a takedown letter first and ask questions later.
Waste more taxpayer dollars shutting down things that innocents use so that we can gain absolutely nothing. Why? Because people are copying data! The horror!
I also said that it was subjective. Which it is. What is and is not good writing is up for the individual to decide. You can tell someone your opinion, but that is all. Saying that reusing words is somehow "wrong" is just your own opinion.
Yeah, someone will do it for free right?
Yes, they will. You can already see this with music, software, and various other things. He said no new content will be created.
So, why not you?
1) Irrelevant.
2) Why not? Did you assume that I wasn't a creator?
There are things that simply can not be free
Sure they can. It might be unlikely, but it is 100% within the realm of possibility.
Free Skyrim? No way.
He didn't mention Skyrim anywhere. He simply said no new content. That implies none at all. That's what I replied to, and somehow you thought I was talking about AAA games.
What? They sell premium accounts, not copyrighted work. Should every site on the internet (or at least ones with ads/premium accounts) be shut down merely because there's a chance that there could be copyrighted work there?
As a creator I'll tell you now if you give all the profits to groups like Rapidshare then there will be no new content.
No new content at all? You're not the only creator in the world, you know. Not everyone does it for money. Just because you claim to be a creator doesn't mean your words are the be-all end-all of the debate.
But here's the thing: their demands never stop. It's impossible to police all the content, and even their current policies are bound to affect innocent users. They shouldn't be forced to scour warez sites just to make sure no one is copying anyone's precious, precious data. Even that is too much to expect. And if it's automated, it's bound to hurt innocents.
Why do we let educational institutions try unproven techniques on our children?
Maybe it's the same reason we've let the current educational system, designed to churn out obedient factory workers, destroy our children's education. Apathy.
How does your home get broken into?
Too many windows. Windows are a vulnerability. Have them all filled in. Second of all, get solid steel doors with plenty of locks. There, done.
Now use Gamemaker.
there are stylistic things, like they reusing words unnecessarily
Which is subjective. Technically, doing that is not in any way wrong.
The theory is that teachers would assign more writing if they didn't have to read it.
Yeah, because quantity > quality. They need to do plenty more mind-numbing activities.
Yes. My deity of the day decided it, so it is true.
Or maybe it's just a personal opinion...
More than two sides exist.
Sexual orientation: pedophile.
And what exactly is wrong with that? I could see it being a problem if they were a child molester, but those two aren't the same thing. Merely being a pedophile is not illegal. Not until we've criminalized thought crimes, of course.
Looks like he was just making an example to me.
and see if they and their children develop "problems" as that is unethical.
If only they could find some way to do it to animals belonging to another species! That would make it objectively okay because humans are objectively more important.
Schools do care about offending people and those who might take offense.
Then shouldn't they just ban all speech? Someone might get offended, after all. Oh, wait. It appears someone already thought of something like that!
They seem to ignore that the environment where they live has rules set and enforced to ensure stability.
You mean like pointless, arbitrary rules against 'profanity'?
It's words that I don't like. And those are bad because I said so.
not as a swear word directed at somebody or something.
I don't really care if it was directed at someone. What happened? Why do some people seem to have this mentality that someone getting offended will bring about the apocalypse?
but in most of the rest of the world
Oh? If true, I wouldn't want to be there.
It's not just the fact that he was punished for posting something that makes it seem idiotic to me. It's the fact that their reasons are always extremely petty. "Profanity." "Swear words." "Someone could get offended!"
Who cares? Are you seriously so oversensitive that you cannot handle the mere mention of a word?
Maybe it is their network, but that doesn't make it seem any less idiotic to me. What are they, oversensitive two year olds? Profanity!? Dirty words!? It's the apocalypse!