I care in the sense that I believe these policies are making society worse, but not in the sense that their arguments will convince me to change my position.
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time.
I don't care what courts do, or what judges say. I reject copyright entirely, as well as the idea that making money off of some data that someone else assembled is anything like theft in the sense that most people understand it. Maybe, legally, it is described using those terms sometimes, but I disagree with that.
most people have had the topic forced into their consciousness and are aware that copyright infringement IS NOT theft.
Most people I know (that aren't technical) don't even understand what copyright infringement is, and often describe it as someone 'stealing' someone's stuff. A lot of people think it's not theft, but there are also many who do.
It wasn't meant to be taken literally, so it's all okay.
Except that, even if it isn't literal, it's still obviously a crock of bullshit, so why think of it as anything more than a series of nonsensical stories? It's about as literal as Harry Potter, and about as useful.
As for being impatient... I take it that that means you do not care that the NSA is violating nearly everyone's fundamental liberties and the constitution each and every day? If anyone isn't "impatient" about solving this problem, they're damn fools.
No. It's because people are so busy just trying to survive that they're too worn out to storm any barricades.
Some people are, but remember that many people actively support this sort of thing and believe that the government (and all people who will ever be in the government) is made up of people who are basically perfectly angels who will never make mistakes or abuse their powers. They ignore history, ignore that we're supposed to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave," and ignore anything that questions their idiotic logic.
To begin with, it's absolute garbage that you even need their permission. Our system is fucked, and they're corrupt pieces of shit for making use of it.
I've looked at the so called 3rd party options to the Democrats and Republicans.
You weren't looking very hard.
They are all worse.
What could be worse than the Patriot Act, draconian copyright laws, free speech zones, constitution-free zones, DUI checkpoints, the NSA's mass surveillance, the drug war, the TSA, any war we've fought in the last several decades, unfettered border searches, stop-and-frisk, mass surveillance of public places, and all the other garbage the two main parties have subjected us to? In "the land of the free", freedom should be considered the most important issue, so even a party with (say) terrible economic policies would be better than these fucking scumbags.
It makes you an idiot because you think anyone who disagrees with you on contentious issues is.
And your post makes you an idiot because you think my opinion about this matter makes me an idiot.
You're not willing to think they might have a valid opinion if it even slightly differs from yours in tone or content.
So you think it is perfectly intelligent to ignore all the government abuses throughout history (even when they're pointed out to you) and support egregious violations of our fundamental liberties and the highest law of the land in the US? An interesting viewpoint, but one I will have to reject. It's not even just about ideology, but also about blatantly ignoring history and pretending that the government is full of perfect beings.
They can have different opinions than me without being idiots, but if they blatantly ignore history, pretend that people in the government can never be corrupt or make mistakes, or treat freedom like it's trash (despite all the historical evidence that this is a very bad idea), then yes, they are idiots. I'm surprised anyone here would object to that.
Which is why you're going to be constantly confused as to why all the "idiots" are always in charge.
What? Why would I be confused? Idiots appeal to idiots. Idiots don't know better and elect more idiots. This is not difficult, so there's nothing to be confused about. Just because someone is an idiot (or someone intelligent taking advantage of idiots) doesn't mean they can't make illogical arguments and convince idiots to put them in a position of power.
Which would be my other pro-tip: if everyone seems like an idiot, then actually just you are.
So, if everyone but me thought that 1 + 1 = 3 and didn't have any sort of critical thinking skills whatsoever, that would mean that I'm the idiot? Your logic is just terrible. The current situation is much better than that, but not to such a degree that most people aren't unintelligent.
because you will consistently underestimate your opponents.
They are idiots, but that doesn't mean you'll underestimate them. I'm perfectly aware that many people are convinced by illogical arguments, which makes idiots dangerous.
How does that make me an idiot? It may mean that I have some principles, and that I love freedom, but is that considered idiotic nowadays? Is not being completely ignorant of history and pretending that people who work for the government are perfect, benevolent angels frowned upon?
The same? Maybe not. But at this point, anyone staying at the NSA is immoral. Ignorance is no longer an excuse, because the ignorance that these things are happening does not exist.
How is what the NSA is doing affecting you right now, such that they have to stop immediately?
They're responsible for egregiously violating nearly everyone's rights and the highest law of the land, something that they continue to make worse with each passing day. I can think of nothing more in need of a quick response.
You'd agree, if you cared at all about fundamental liberties.
Of course just about everybody in Congress voted in favor of the PATRIOT Act. If they hadn't, their political opponents at home would have had a field day in the next election cycle. "Congressman Blowhard is AGAINST security. Vote for Candidate Fuckwad. HE'LL KEEP YOU SAFE!" At the time, if you weren't in lockstep because "America! FUCK YEAH!!" you got accused of being unAmerican, told to pack your shit and leave the country, etc. Because, if you didn't buy corporate America, the terrorrorrorrists win.
I'm well aware of the reason, but there is no moral excuse for violating people's rights or the constitution. Not that it matters to these political hacks.
And no, you can't stop the law of the land with an executive order.
Didn't stop him from doing all sorts of other shit.
That's not what they're for.
To be honest, I'd rather they simply not exist.
They have no standing or force outside the branch.
This is the NSA we're talking about. He should just "prioritize" their funding away from them.
Skeptics seem to have this assumption that humans are inherently rational
They do? Well, I don't. I know that most people are utterly irrational, but that doesn't mean we should never try to help them come to more rational conclusions.
Believing in something without good evidence (or using ignorance as evidence) is valid? Why not believe in Santa, the flying spaghetti monster, Thor, or any number of other random shit that people could come up with? It's not a valid conclusion; it's an irrational one.
Well, depending on the religion. Not all religions require you believe in gods and such.
No, I don't. I didn't vote for Romney *or* Obama. There are other options, even in a two party system. If you vote for the 'lesser' of two evils, you're still voting for an evil scumbag, which is immoral. I'd rather vote for someone I actually like, even if it has zero effect on anything (but it doesn't, because it can send a message to other parties; or cause third parties to adopt policies that the two main parties were ignoring, which gets them more votes, which then sends a message to the two scumbag parties.). Maybe not very efficient, but better than voting for evil.
I don't blame him one bit for not sticking his neck out.
You don't blame him one bit for not trying to stop the egregious violation of our fundamental liberties and our constitution (Which he swore an oath to.), things which should be the most important issues in "the land of the free and the home of the brave"? Really?
Slashdot Mirror
Unlike other works of fiction (and even in works of fiction, you can say some truthful things), many people seem to take the bible seriously.
You are supposed to read it and think "people should act this way"
Wow, that's scary. I hope people don't act in the way people in the bible acted.
Literal or no, it's clearly a crock of shit.
I care in the sense that I believe these policies are making society worse, but not in the sense that their arguments will convince me to change my position.
Civil courts award money for loss of livelihood all the time.
I don't care what courts do, or what judges say. I reject copyright entirely, as well as the idea that making money off of some data that someone else assembled is anything like theft in the sense that most people understand it. Maybe, legally, it is described using those terms sometimes, but I disagree with that.
most people have had the topic forced into their consciousness and are aware that copyright infringement IS NOT theft.
Most people I know (that aren't technical) don't even understand what copyright infringement is, and often describe it as someone 'stealing' someone's stuff. A lot of people think it's not theft, but there are also many who do.
it would be difficult to argue, especially in a court of law
It's not that it's difficult to argue; it's that some people don't care about logic. Courts just care about laws.
namely, the theft of livelihood from Person A.
What theft? Money they never had and was never theirs cannot be stolen. Potential profit is not the same as owning the money yourself.
It wasn't meant to be taken literally, so it's all okay.
Except that, even if it isn't literal, it's still obviously a crock of bullshit, so why think of it as anything more than a series of nonsensical stories? It's about as literal as Harry Potter, and about as useful.
What totalitarian outcome? What the hell are you talking about?
As for being impatient... I take it that that means you do not care that the NSA is violating nearly everyone's fundamental liberties and the constitution each and every day? If anyone isn't "impatient" about solving this problem, they're damn fools.
You're just impatient and young.
Assumptions completely without merit.
Truth. Much worse things have happened than NSA spying.
Just because X is worse than Y doesn't mean Y isn't bad.
Breaking the US system of laws to solve this one problem is stupid and shortsighted.
As the poster above has shown, solving this problem wouldn't break a damn thing, as the court has been known to make exceptions.
This should be an exception, because this sort of thing violates nearly everyone's fundamental liberties, and the constitution itself.
No. It's because people are so busy just trying to survive that they're too worn out to storm any barricades.
Some people are, but remember that many people actively support this sort of thing and believe that the government (and all people who will ever be in the government) is made up of people who are basically perfectly angels who will never make mistakes or abuse their powers. They ignore history, ignore that we're supposed to be "the land of the free and the home of the brave," and ignore anything that questions their idiotic logic.
To begin with, it's absolute garbage that you even need their permission. Our system is fucked, and they're corrupt pieces of shit for making use of it.
I've looked at the so called 3rd party options to the Democrats and Republicans.
You weren't looking very hard.
They are all worse.
What could be worse than the Patriot Act, draconian copyright laws, free speech zones, constitution-free zones, DUI checkpoints, the NSA's mass surveillance, the drug war, the TSA, any war we've fought in the last several decades, unfettered border searches, stop-and-frisk, mass surveillance of public places, and all the other garbage the two main parties have subjected us to? In "the land of the free", freedom should be considered the most important issue, so even a party with (say) terrible economic policies would be better than these fucking scumbags.
I would rather just not have government thugs harassing people in airports. Screw any 'safety' that this may provide; I'll do without.
A pro-tip for you: If someone seems like an idiot for believing that most people are idiots, then actually you're the idiot.
Making statements is easy.
It makes you an idiot because you think anyone who disagrees with you on contentious issues is.
And your post makes you an idiot because you think my opinion about this matter makes me an idiot.
You're not willing to think they might have a valid opinion if it even slightly differs from yours in tone or content.
So you think it is perfectly intelligent to ignore all the government abuses throughout history (even when they're pointed out to you) and support egregious violations of our fundamental liberties and the highest law of the land in the US? An interesting viewpoint, but one I will have to reject. It's not even just about ideology, but also about blatantly ignoring history and pretending that the government is full of perfect beings.
They can have different opinions than me without being idiots, but if they blatantly ignore history, pretend that people in the government can never be corrupt or make mistakes, or treat freedom like it's trash (despite all the historical evidence that this is a very bad idea), then yes, they are idiots. I'm surprised anyone here would object to that.
Which is why you're going to be constantly confused as to why all the "idiots" are always in charge.
What? Why would I be confused? Idiots appeal to idiots. Idiots don't know better and elect more idiots. This is not difficult, so there's nothing to be confused about. Just because someone is an idiot (or someone intelligent taking advantage of idiots) doesn't mean they can't make illogical arguments and convince idiots to put them in a position of power.
Which would be my other pro-tip: if everyone seems like an idiot, then actually just you are.
So, if everyone but me thought that 1 + 1 = 3 and didn't have any sort of critical thinking skills whatsoever, that would mean that I'm the idiot? Your logic is just terrible. The current situation is much better than that, but not to such a degree that most people aren't unintelligent.
because you will consistently underestimate your opponents.
They are idiots, but that doesn't mean you'll underestimate them. I'm perfectly aware that many people are convinced by illogical arguments, which makes idiots dangerous.
How does that make me an idiot? It may mean that I have some principles, and that I love freedom, but is that considered idiotic nowadays? Is not being completely ignorant of history and pretending that people who work for the government are perfect, benevolent angels frowned upon?
Your post makes it seem like you think so.
The same? Maybe not. But at this point, anyone staying at the NSA is immoral. Ignorance is no longer an excuse, because the ignorance that these things are happening does not exist.
How is what the NSA is doing affecting you right now, such that they have to stop immediately?
They're responsible for egregiously violating nearly everyone's rights and the highest law of the land, something that they continue to make worse with each passing day. I can think of nothing more in need of a quick response.
You'd agree, if you cared at all about fundamental liberties.
Of course just about everybody in Congress voted in favor of the PATRIOT Act. If they hadn't, their political opponents at home would have had a field day in the next election cycle. "Congressman Blowhard is AGAINST security. Vote for Candidate Fuckwad. HE'LL KEEP YOU SAFE!" At the time, if you weren't in lockstep because "America! FUCK YEAH!!" you got accused of being unAmerican, told to pack your shit and leave the country, etc. Because, if you didn't buy corporate America, the terrorrorrorrists win.
I'm well aware of the reason, but there is no moral excuse for violating people's rights or the constitution. Not that it matters to these political hacks.
And no, you can't stop the law of the land with an executive order.
Didn't stop him from doing all sorts of other shit.
That's not what they're for.
To be honest, I'd rather they simply not exist.
They have no standing or force outside the branch.
This is the NSA we're talking about. He should just "prioritize" their funding away from them.
Skeptics seem to have this assumption that humans are inherently rational
They do? Well, I don't. I know that most people are utterly irrational, but that doesn't mean we should never try to help them come to more rational conclusions.
Believing in something without good evidence (or using ignorance as evidence) is valid? Why not believe in Santa, the flying spaghetti monster, Thor, or any number of other random shit that people could come up with? It's not a valid conclusion; it's an irrational one.
Well, depending on the religion. Not all religions require you believe in gods and such.
No, I don't. I didn't vote for Romney *or* Obama. There are other options, even in a two party system. If you vote for the 'lesser' of two evils, you're still voting for an evil scumbag, which is immoral. I'd rather vote for someone I actually like, even if it has zero effect on anything (but it doesn't, because it can send a message to other parties; or cause third parties to adopt policies that the two main parties were ignoring, which gets them more votes, which then sends a message to the two scumbag parties.). Maybe not very efficient, but better than voting for evil.
I don't see where he said that. You must like straw men.
I don't blame him one bit for not sticking his neck out.
You don't blame him one bit for not trying to stop the egregious violation of our fundamental liberties and our constitution (Which he swore an oath to.), things which should be the most important issues in "the land of the free and the home of the brave"? Really?
Some priorities you have.