Absolutely true, and I would point that crap out as well in a thread primarily concerned with religion. Don't make the mistake of thinking I oppose porn lock, stock, and barrel, or that I even agree with Jon's religious beliefs. I originally posted a reply becuse I believe that Jon should be able to state an unpopular (on Slashdot) belief without automatically being labelled a troll. As far as exploitation goes, the world is full of people who are willing to overlook the evil present in their pet area, whether that be porn, religion, politics, etc. All I did was point out that Bad Things are present in the porn industry and there is ample evidence to support this, nothing more. Any attitudes assigned to me beyond this are assumptions that are not necessarily true.
There goes my plan to keep forwarding RIAA trademarks through my Hotmail account until Microsoft started claiming "rights" to them and the RIAA sued Billy boy and friends.
Hmmmm....RIAA vs. Microsoft. Who the hell do you root for?
Well thank God...(oops, never mind) um...Thank Reason you were here to clear up this whole Religion mess. I feel so...enlightened! You obviously have done hundreds of hours of painstaking research into this subject, and I for one applaud you. Would you mind replying to this posting with a listing of texts and available materials that you have perused, so that we too may read and reserach why and how the concept of religion started , as you have obviously done?
As well as in the real estate industry, politics and law enforcement. Exploitation isn't a symptom of pornography, its a symptom of humanity.
I certainly won't argue that point with you, but, you know, I don't typically hear arguments on/. defending politics as free from exploitation, coercion, or corruption, yet when it comes to porn, all of a sudden, we get postings like
No one is forcing any of these women to be involved in pornography.
Do you have any evidence for this? Or you just making this up?
Stating such contentious beliefs (porn not used by men with a loving partner, the existance of god) as facts can only be a troll; anyone else would have put "I beleive", "IMHO", or somthing else along those lines in there.
Compared to some of the things I have seen presented as "fact" on/. this actually seems tame (for lack of a better word)
It seems the only time I see people using "I believe" at the start of a post is when they're afraid of arousing the wrath of the Karma Gods.
How about dozens of first hand accounts by former porn actresses. How about lawsuits filed against porno producers. How about the Hollywood police files? Do me a favor, go to google, they have a wonderful new tool there, it's called a SEARCH ENGINE. It's not that hard to find evidence of corecion and exploitationin the porn industry, unless of course, you don't want to see any.
The only thing I find ironic after reading your post is your username. "logic" indeed.
And this is a troll how? The guy states an opinion based on his convictions (read his user bio) and it's a troll. Looks like we found another sacred cow for/.ers. Hey, don't diss the porn, man.
As far as all of the posts touting the benefits of porn go, don't be so naive as to think that it's all willing women happily gulping jizz. Yep, some, maybe even most, are willing, but if you think coercion and exploitation don't happen in the porn industry, you must just be another Kansas farm boy who believes everything they read in Playboy. Take them rose colored condoms off and wipe the cream off your monitor.
Nope, not buying the locked in argument. The only thing preventing people from switching to other clients is convenience. It's inconvenient for everyone to switch. Well, so what? Life is hard. I'm not trying to troll here (really), but it seems like this issue is being blown WAY out of proportion. If AOL is foolish enough to keep pulling stunts like this, eventually their user base WILL dry up, as people move to interoperable clients. Internet Darwinism at it's finest.
You really need to sit down and take a refresher in copyright law. The original purpose of copyright law was to strike a balance between the right of the artist to earn a living and the public well being. "Art exists for it's own sake" is nothing more than a cop out for people who are too selfish to give benefit for receiving benefit.
Actually, I still live without enough to afford much of any entertainment technology. 5 year old CD player, 7 year old lousy TV, no cable, etc. Not that any of it is relevant to the discussion at hand.
Yes, it sucks that sometimes I cannot listen to bands I like whenever I want, because I don't have the cash to get their latest CD. However, I do not believe that gives me the right to use their creations for my enjoyment with compensating them. And your line about only the most successful artists suffering is crap. Every music artist with any sort of national following is affected by Napster.
Oh, and to state the obvious, at least I have an account, coward
Point taken. I agree he could have phrased it better, but looking at the point of the post, he was making a rather astute observation in my view. I realize that there is music legally available for download on Napster. I'm sure there is also information available in CDDB that was placed there by people who don't give a damn about how it's used. I guess where I'm coming from, and I believe the original poster was coming from, is that a lot of content creators get screwed over in each situation, and that's wrong. But there shouldn't be a distinction between the two situations, in my mind.
Not even close, son. To say there are only two sides to this is narrow thinking. The RIAA can rot in hell for all I care, but what I will not apologize for is believing that the creators of content have the right to be compensated for the use of that content, if that is what they desire. I have no problems with MP3s, internet distribution, or new methods of payment. I see what the CDDB did and what most Napster users do as the same thing, screwing over the content creators, and that sucks.
If artists don't want their music put into MP3 format, they can simply keep it to themselves, or perhaps find a less liberal country than the United States (maybe they can convince SeaLand to change their laws?) to harbour their music.
Hey, I know, if you don't want to pay 50% of your gross income in taxes, don't make any money, or go find a country to live in where they don't have taxes.
Can't see how you would consider the original post a troll, except that he dares to go against the Slashdot mob party line. The point is that both CDDB and Napster have used content created by outside sources in ways those sources did not appreciate. I suspect your feelings over CDDB are rather similar to those artists who do not appreciate wholesale piracy of their music.
To mention badgering the Pillsbury Doughboy in a thread about black holes is... um... kinda kinky, IMHO. But hey, if that's your thing, I got no problems with it.
She's good, although I really don't like that military-type boyfriend she has. He's the kind of guy you think is going to end up becoming part of some metallic, spiked killing machine from the future.:-)
1. Have a seperate children's section of the library where filtering software is installed, and only give the children access to those machines.
2. Require parents to physically be with their children when they (children) access the internet.
Due to the ineffectiveness of filters, I support the second much more than the first.
Slashdot Mirror
Absolutely true, and I would point that crap out as well in a thread primarily concerned with religion. Don't make the mistake of thinking I oppose porn lock, stock, and barrel, or that I even agree with Jon's religious beliefs. I originally posted a reply becuse I believe that Jon should be able to state an unpopular (on Slashdot) belief without automatically being labelled a troll. As far as exploitation goes, the world is full of people who are willing to overlook the evil present in their pet area, whether that be porn, religion, politics, etc. All I did was point out that Bad Things are present in the porn industry and there is ample evidence to support this, nothing more. Any attitudes assigned to me beyond this are assumptions that are not necessarily true.
There goes my plan to keep forwarding RIAA trademarks through my Hotmail account until Microsoft started claiming "rights" to them and the RIAA sued Billy boy and friends.
Hmmmm....RIAA vs. Microsoft. Who the hell do you root for?
Well thank God...(oops, never mind) um...Thank Reason you were here to clear up this whole Religion mess. I feel so...enlightened! You obviously have done hundreds of hours of painstaking research into this subject, and I for one applaud you. Would you mind replying to this posting with a listing of texts and available materials that you have perused, so that we too may read and reserach why and how the concept of religion started , as you have obviously done?
As well as in the real estate industry, politics and law enforcement. Exploitation isn't a symptom of pornography, its a symptom of humanity.
/. defending politics as free from exploitation, coercion, or corruption, yet when it comes to porn, all of a sudden, we get postings like
I certainly won't argue that point with you, but, you know, I don't typically hear arguments on
No one is forcing any of these women to be involved in pornography.
Do you have any evidence for this? Or you just making this up?
Why the double standard?
Tell me again, why are you still reading Slashdot?
You're not worth arguing with.
Coulda fooled me
Stating such contentious beliefs (porn not used by men with a loving partner, the existance of god) as facts can only be a troll; anyone else would have put "I beleive", "IMHO", or somthing else along those lines in there.
/. this actually seems tame (for lack of a better word)
;-P
Compared to some of the things I have seen presented as "fact" on
It seems the only time I see people using "I believe" at the start of a post is when they're afraid of arousing the wrath of the Karma Gods.
At least that's what I believe
How about dozens of first hand accounts by former porn actresses. How about lawsuits filed against porno producers. How about the Hollywood police files? Do me a favor, go to google, they have a wonderful new tool there, it's called a SEARCH ENGINE. It's not that hard to find evidence of corecion and exploitationin the porn industry, unless of course, you don't want to see any.
The only thing I find ironic after reading your post is your username. "logic" indeed.
And this is a troll how? The guy states an opinion based on his convictions (read his user bio) and it's a troll. Looks like we found another sacred cow for /.ers. Hey, don't diss the porn, man.
As far as all of the posts touting the benefits of porn go, don't be so naive as to think that it's all willing women happily gulping jizz. Yep, some, maybe even most, are willing, but if you think coercion and exploitation don't happen in the porn industry, you must just be another Kansas farm boy who believes everything they read in Playboy. Take them rose colored condoms off and wipe the cream off your monitor.
Nope, not buying the locked in argument. The only thing preventing people from switching to other clients is convenience. It's inconvenient for everyone to switch. Well, so what? Life is hard. I'm not trying to troll here (really), but it seems like this issue is being blown WAY out of proportion. If AOL is foolish enough to keep pulling stunts like this, eventually their user base WILL dry up, as people move to interoperable clients. Internet Darwinism at it's finest.
You really need to sit down and take a refresher in copyright law. The original purpose of copyright law was to strike a balance between the right of the artist to earn a living and the public well being. "Art exists for it's own sake" is nothing more than a cop out for people who are too selfish to give benefit for receiving benefit.
Lucky? Your wording is just propoganda.
Yeah, but she made it through ok, and she hooked up with this nice Aeana girl...or maybe it's Ananda, I forget. I'm getting old you know.
Actually, I still live without enough to afford much of any entertainment technology. 5 year old CD player, 7 year old lousy TV, no cable, etc. Not that any of it is relevant to the discussion at hand.
Yes, it sucks that sometimes I cannot listen to bands I like whenever I want, because I don't have the cash to get their latest CD. However, I do not believe that gives me the right to use their creations for my enjoyment with compensating them. And your line about only the most successful artists suffering is crap. Every music artist with any sort of national following is affected by Napster.
Oh, and to state the obvious, at least I have an account, coward
Point taken. I agree he could have phrased it better, but looking at the point of the post, he was making a rather astute observation in my view. I realize that there is music legally available for download on Napster. I'm sure there is also information available in CDDB that was placed there by people who don't give a damn about how it's used.
I guess where I'm coming from, and I believe the original poster was coming from, is that a lot of content creators get screwed over in each situation, and that's wrong. But there shouldn't be a distinction between the two situations, in my mind.
Not even close, son. To say there are only two sides to this is narrow thinking. The RIAA can rot in hell for all I care, but what I will not apologize for is believing that the creators of content have the right to be compensated for the use of that content, if that is what they desire. I have no problems with MP3s, internet distribution, or new methods of payment. I see what the CDDB did and what most Napster users do as the same thing, screwing over the content creators, and that sucks.
If artists don't want their music put into MP3 format, they can simply keep it to themselves, or perhaps find a less liberal country than the United States (maybe they can convince SeaLand to change their laws?) to harbour their music.
Hey, I know, if you don't want to pay 50% of your gross income in taxes, don't make any money, or go find a country to live in where they don't have taxes.
Can't see how you would consider the original post a troll, except that he dares to go against the Slashdot mob party line. The point is that both CDDB and Napster have used content created by outside sources in ways those sources did not appreciate. I suspect your feelings over CDDB are rather similar to those artists who do not appreciate wholesale piracy of their music.
To mention badgering the Pillsbury Doughboy in a thread about black holes is ... um ... kinda kinky, IMHO. But hey, if that's your thing, I got no problems with it.
You mean that incredible sucking sound has been coming from Redmond all this time?
Thanks man, right back at ya.
She's good, although I really don't like that military-type boyfriend she has. He's the kind of guy you think is going to end up becoming part of some metallic, spiked killing machine from the future. :-)
Hey come on everyone, it's time to do that dance craze that's sweeping Slashdot, the troll! It's easy to do, it just has three steps
1. Defend Windows
2. Insult Linux in some fashion.
3.Repeat until you feel funky!
Cueing the Daft Punk now
Ohhhhhh, pretty!
poing - poing - poing
Billly, Well, a couple possible solutions are:
1. Have a seperate children's section of the library where filtering software is installed, and only give the children access to those machines. 2. Require parents to physically be with their children when they (children) access the internet. Due to the ineffectiveness of filters, I support the second much more than the first.
Dude, really? None bigger? Wow, that's AWESOME.
May I remind you that you play petty games rather well yourself. See your post about punctuation. Hypocrite