Well, you see, people always chisel in exceptions. "You can't say fire in a crowded theatre" led to this. The concept that speech can be damaging is directly responsible for this. And yes, I think saying fire in a crowded theatre is just fine. If somebody tramples someone else in a panic (like George Costanza in that Seinfeld episode), it is THAT person who acted like an animal. In the specific case of there being no fire, it is a person trampling someone in response to a claim that has no evidence supporting it, and is little different to me than a religious honor killing: Taking a life via fiath. We all had fire drills. Trampling someone is a violation the firedrill training every child and college student had in every school and dorm. Far more of a violation than pranking people. This is how they got the Aqua Teen Hunger Force guys hauled before a judge for scaring the city of Boston, too. The "fire..theatre" logic.
I.... lost what the point you were trying to make was. I wouldn't go nearly that far. Simply that they have diminishing returns. They cost more than landlines. I have a GPS that I got for free. So it's not going to keep me from getting lost. Even then, I already decided I'd rather get lost now and then than pay for it. Most importantly, I'm usually near one, so I get some benefit without paying a damn penny. Meanwhile, the audio quality on my landline is excellent in comparison to every cell I've used in my life. My wife has a cell phone, so I'm usually near one anyway.
It absolutely HAS been an issue, with many lawsuits related to it, and many people injured by cops texting, using their laptop, speeding -- without their sirens on.
So you make $5 every 2 days? That's $910 a year. Peopel keep saying the electricity doesn't cover the money you make, but hey, if you live in a place that gives free electricity....
Eh, your whole post seems to be appeal towards fear of the strong. I'm glad the many people who have fought evil powers that be have not learned helplessness the way you have. Last I checked, picking a fight with the biggest [student|inmate] at [school|jail] is a great way to prove yourself and get respect and status. Now I have a distant acquaintance who was raided by the FBI a year ago. I didn't know this until I realized I hadn't seen him for 2 yrs and asked him if he was still friends. He told me he had been scared to basically go to parties and associate with people because he didn't want to get THEM in trouble. Why did the FBI raid him? Becuase he'd been using the same username as someone in anonymous. He'd been using this name for well over a decade -- way way before anonymous existed.
So we're raiding people because they picked the wrong username, and somehow our vast powerful intelligence community can't tell the difference or find the real people. I'm sure anonymous is NOT quaking in their boots right now.
Huh? The zoom levels on the HTML that displayed the JPGs on the webpage have nothing to do with it - the bluray will be at 1080p the entire time. Always "zoomed", in your strange vernacular.
Do you understand the concept of used? The government has no idea who buys something at a yard sale at my house. Anything bought in cash - good luck tracking that. Doesn't matter if I bought it from Satan himself - if it's at a yard sale, or even (to a lesser extent, depending on the individual's fastidiousness to e-privacy) on craigslist -- nobody's gonna know it was me.
I still see no difference; both sites start with a paid version (even if you OCR a physical book into a pirated e-book, it was still bought originally; otherwise you paid for the ebook format, and it was still bought originally). Once a person has it in their own home, nothing can stop them from pirating it, regardless of the format (OCR/Xerox/photograph/scan/DRM-break). I see almost no difference other than ease of access, which doesn't change a damn thing philosophically (IMO). That a book can be copied is a function of the new electronic information age, and I see that as no excuse to shut down free literature under the presumption that everyone reading something wants a copy. I have photocopied books at home, yet we still fund the libraries with our tax dollars, despite how much gas and paper we'd save if all our books were electronic. So the same thing comes along electronically, and, uh, my tax dollars go to stop it instead. Just great.
Both of them are the same to me, in that both make an assumption that you, in the privacy of your own home, don't find a way to copy it. All DRM is defeatable, and all books are photocopyable (I have several of those).
One uses less resources/energy/environmental impact, one doesn't. Guess which one our taxes fund, and which ones our taxes (now, apparently) work against?
I'm ok with it too, but there's nothing stopping anybody from photocopying a whole book from the library, so someone sufficiently motivated is going to do it either way. (Indeed, I got my father to do this for me several times - wasting federal taxpayer money, oil/gas, and trees.)
Mankind has to accept that we're in an electronic age, and certain things are easier.
We wouldn't accept having the police follow us into our own home to make sure we don't photocopy a book after lending it from the library; so the library stands in assumption that you don't do anything illegal. But when this is done online, the assumption is that it's all illegal, so the [online] library gets shut down. Congratulations, back to photocopiers and OCR. The tide will only ever be slowed, not stopped.
As stated in my original post, whoever wants to pay/borrow/steal can do it either way. One wastes more energy and resources, so I view that one as worse.
Digital files aren't forever either. (If they are, someone please send me those files I lost in the 90s.) That implies purchase of additional storage, or multiple backups of files in heavy circulation (I have my music on 3 harddrives because I lost it all before). Stuff that's posted on bittorrent often isn't available a few years later because nobody else is in there sharing it. Stuff goes away either way. But again, one burns trees and energy, and the other.... much less so.
Slashdot Mirror
Well, you see, people always chisel in exceptions. "You can't say fire in a crowded theatre" led to this. The concept that speech can be damaging is directly responsible for this. And yes, I think saying fire in a crowded theatre is just fine. If somebody tramples someone else in a panic (like George Costanza in that Seinfeld episode), it is THAT person who acted like an animal. In the specific case of there being no fire, it is a person trampling someone in response to a claim that has no evidence supporting it, and is little different to me than a religious honor killing: Taking a life via fiath. We all had fire drills. Trampling someone is a violation the firedrill training every child and college student had in every school and dorm. Far more of a violation than pranking people. This is how they got the Aqua Teen Hunger Force guys hauled before a judge for scaring the city of Boston, too. The "fire..theatre" logic.
Well, you are wrong. And kind of sappy, too. Take it from a true neutral: Not everybody needs or wants morals.
Too bad that's not what this is about, and your comment is thusly wholly irrelevant. There's a big difference between "less" and "none".
I.... lost what the point you were trying to make was. I wouldn't go nearly that far. Simply that they have diminishing returns. They cost more than landlines. I have a GPS that I got for free. So it's not going to keep me from getting lost. Even then, I already decided I'd rather get lost now and then than pay for it. Most importantly, I'm usually near one, so I get some benefit without paying a damn penny. Meanwhile, the audio quality on my landline is excellent in comparison to every cell I've used in my life. My wife has a cell phone, so I'm usually near one anyway.
It absolutely HAS been an issue, with many lawsuits related to it, and many people injured by cops texting, using their laptop, speeding -- without their sirens on.
Maybe a little less now?
Yay, us.
So you make $5 every 2 days? That's $910 a year. Peopel keep saying the electricity doesn't cover the money you make, but hey, if you live in a place that gives free electricity....
About 4 years in jail.
Huh? Every time we invade Iraq, gas prices go way up.
So we're raiding people because they picked the wrong username, and somehow our vast powerful intelligence community can't tell the difference or find the real people. I'm sure anonymous is NOT quaking in their boots right now.
If US intelligence has access to the results of their spying, OR pays for it, then it has WAY MORE THAN ZERO to do with it.
Nice try at 2 + 2 = 5, though. It would be commendable if you had the balls to not be anonymous about it.
Huh? The zoom levels on the HTML that displayed the JPGs on the webpage have nothing to do with it - the bluray will be at 1080p the entire time. Always "zoomed", in your strange vernacular.
what a dick
Isn't the suicide rate for adults lower than college age people in the first place?
*there
People actually believe this makes a difference? Seems like folly to me.
So if someone is in my driveway taking pictures of me, I can blow up their car? At least, by your logic.
Do you understand the concept of used? The government has no idea who buys something at a yard sale at my house. Anything bought in cash - good luck tracking that. Doesn't matter if I bought it from Satan himself - if it's at a yard sale, or even (to a lesser extent, depending on the individual's fastidiousness to e-privacy) on craigslist -- nobody's gonna know it was me.
so buy your printers used. not a big deal. Preferably, buy them used from your political enemies, so anything bad traces back to *them*.
s/That a book can be copied/That an e-book can be copied/
I still see no difference; both sites start with a paid version (even if you OCR a physical book into a pirated e-book, it was still bought originally; otherwise you paid for the ebook format, and it was still bought originally). Once a person has it in their own home, nothing can stop them from pirating it, regardless of the format (OCR/Xerox/photograph/scan/DRM-break). I see almost no difference other than ease of access, which doesn't change a damn thing philosophically (IMO). That a book can be copied is a function of the new electronic information age, and I see that as no excuse to shut down free literature under the presumption that everyone reading something wants a copy. I have photocopied books at home, yet we still fund the libraries with our tax dollars, despite how much gas and paper we'd save if all our books were electronic. So the same thing comes along electronically, and, uh, my tax dollars go to stop it instead. Just great.
One uses less resources/energy/environmental impact, one doesn't. Guess which one our taxes fund, and which ones our taxes (now, apparently) work against?
Mankind has to accept that we're in an electronic age, and certain things are easier.
We wouldn't accept having the police follow us into our own home to make sure we don't photocopy a book after lending it from the library; so the library stands in assumption that you don't do anything illegal. But when this is done online, the assumption is that it's all illegal, so the [online] library gets shut down. Congratulations, back to photocopiers and OCR. The tide will only ever be slowed, not stopped.
As stated in my original post, whoever wants to pay/borrow/steal can do it either way. One wastes more energy and resources, so I view that one as worse.
Digital files aren't forever either. (If they are, someone please send me those files I lost in the 90s.) That implies purchase of additional storage, or multiple backups of files in heavy circulation (I have my music on 3 harddrives because I lost it all before). Stuff that's posted on bittorrent often isn't available a few years later because nobody else is in there sharing it. Stuff goes away either way. But again, one burns trees and energy, and the other.... much less so.