Well if you zoom out one step, the filmmaker created this movie because he was offended by acts committed by Muslims around the world, which means Muslims were responsible for the film being made, which makes them guilty of fomenting blasphemy about their own religion, which makes them guilty of offending themselves, which makes them guilty of violence and killings. Then if you zoom out another step, those Muslims did those things because they were offended by non-Muslims doing things that were incompatible with Islam, which means non-Muslims were responsible for what those Muslims did, which was responsible for this guy making a movie about Mohammad, which was responsible for Muslim violence and killings we see today.
Eventually, you'd zoom out to the sun. Without the sun, trees would not have grown and ships would not have been built, and grass would not have grown and camels and horses would not have flourished, and people would never have traveled and different civilizations would never have known of each other's existence, and people in one region would have stayed in their respective caves and ate their fungi and worshiped their gods in isolated peace. So what's the point I'm trying to make here? We should have censored sunlight a long time ago.
Do you also think the Norwegian Labor Party should be censored because a follower of Breivik's ideology might be offended by their stance on immigration, and go on another shooting spree because they see it as a message that embraces the destruction of their white race? After all, we have to appreciate the fact that the white nationalists likely perceive the pro-immigration message as a threat.
If you read OP's post, he says that eradication of crime was not the goal, but rather management of crime levels. This, in the context of our present article, means he obviously believes that eradication of piracy is not the goal of IP holders -- as is presume by many in these comments, but rather management of piracy levels. You responded to him in a oblique manner that sidestepped his point entirely.
On the issue of life long copyright, and its relevance to our discussion, I still stand by my initial post. 1.2k seeders and only 63 leechers are not going to be on anyone's radar when the greater context consists of https://thepiratebay.se/top/200 and https://thepiratebay.se/top/400 Being against exceedingly long copyright terms and being against copyright infringement are two separate positions. One can be for both, against both, or a combination of the two. What one cannot do is to conflate the two into a single argument.
Minimizing crime to a reasonable level IS improving society. So your comment on that is not a rebuttal, but a banal restatement.
lifelong copyrights
I don't know why this is even part of the conversation. If you go on TPB or any other torrent site, you will be hard pressed to find anyone seeking old material whose only protection is lifelong copyright. The majority of copyright infringement is on the latest releases, so your argument against lifelong copyright, while sensible and appropriate in a general discussion on copyright law, is not relevant in the case of media piracy.
they keep making bad movies
I can understand how that can be a valid reason for people who pirate in order to "try before you buy," but in no way is that a valid reason for the multitude of other excuses.
Take evolution for example. I have rarely read or heard of scientists describing evolution in the most mundane but factually correct way -- the genetic change within a species resulting from natural selection*, a process that is merely the dying off of lineages that could not cope with the environmental conditions, or could not compete with other lineages -- except in textbooks. I do, however, remember guest scientists on documentaries and nature magazines wax poetically about a species' epic struggle of survival in a sea of hostility.
It's like they thought people would be too dumb to understand, so they preemptively dumbed it down, and now we wonder why people are still dumb. It's because YOU -- the only hope they had of being educated -- gave up.
*Notice also how experts do like to make up grandiose names that illicit the image of a supreme intelligence, like "natural SELECTION" and "the INVISIBLE HAND". That's not helping, either.
And it's the first photo you see when you go on their website http://en.chinafotopress.com/ Probably some local Chinese photographer wanted a quick buck from some gullible Britons.
On the captions you see it's by China Photo Press/Barcroft Media, which means DailyMail bought them from 3rd party photo journalists, who obviously were looking for a quick sell and weren't concerned with some color enhancement. Here's a phone camera video taken yesterday http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDQ3ODM2NDUy.html It's not as red as the photos, but still very red. The locals who are talking to the guy filming say it's the first time they've seen anything like this, so it's not a total fake either.
A nobody coming from the very bottom will undoubtedly benefit from the publicity of doing something like this, because the rush of publicity and the sympathy money will make up for the low sales to download ratio. AAA developers will receive no sympathy, nor will they benefit from additional publicity on their already famous franchises, which means it won't work for them except to lower their revenue.
So, Pirate Bay make sense for upstarts, and that's about it.
It doesn't matter if Romney releases them now. It's too late to appease certain people. He didn't release them the moment his opponents called for them, which to some is a sign of guilt. We saw this 4 years ago. If Obama had released his birth certificate even just a week late, those among his opponents who had been clamoring to get at it would still have called it a forgery. If Romney were to ever release his personal tax documents, you can bet those clamoring to get at them will say it has been washed by a team of lawyers and accountants.
Politics today consists of partisan loudmouths bouncing off of each other, pulling the country further apart with ever more heated rhetoric and accusations. Democrats and Republicans alike will say it's the other side that does it. Those principled few among us, who can support the privacy of both these men, are cast as shills whenever convenient.
Very unexpected for a typically pessimistic crowd. Definitely bookmarking this thread for comparison when a Republican President posts his putting tips or something. I'll bet/. would pounce on that, but you never know... you guys have surprised me before.
What I meant was that slavery by Africans had no effect on the general progression of slavery in the world, because institutionalized slavery is ancient and it had tremendous inertia. The US was going to be a part of the Atlantic slave trade with or without African slave lords, in the same way that cyberattacks were going to happen with or without Stuxnet
What makes you think people don't expect China or Russia to be "good guys" or that people expect the US to be "good guys"? Chinese, Russian, and American politicians all claim their country to be beacons of some sort, leaders in progress, yet you only hold one of them to that claim.
"America sets the example"? I can bet if we were talking about some positive aspect, you wouldn't use such egotistical US-centric rhetoric. The fact is those countries you listed would have done what they did no matter what, and used whatever excuse was convenient to them.
the Anon is absolutely right, though. Dinosaur is more of a catch-all term. Sure, evidence links many dinosaur species to modern birds, but there are many more without such links. Biology/paleontology is science, and its terminology IS NOT and SHOULD NOT change due to popular usage (or in this case, half-ignorant pseudo-intelligence).
If they fail and harm themselves as a result, the state should treat them - with group freedom comes group responsibility.
I know we want to have our cake and eat it too, but social programs aren't sustainable if personal behavior isn't regulated to some degree. It's sad to have to do it, but you just can't afford to piss off the responsible productive citizens who pay for it all by giving them nothing while they carry the burden of those who happily harm themselves. Unless, of course, you're willing to resort to soviet style emigration restrictions to prevent the inevitable human capital flight.
I see them both as moderates. Romney is pulled by the vocal (and more extreme) wing of his party, and forced to differentiate himself from a moderate Obama. When you must make yourself stand apart from the center, you have no choice but to go towards either wing, and as a Republican there is no place for him to go but to the right. It's tragic, really. You can tell that he's tired of going back on his word and his record as Governor, and that he lacks conviction when he panders to that faction. I'm quite hopeful that if he does win, he won't be keeping many promises to the Tea Party. Though, that's not a risk I'd like to take.
Socialism and Fascism aren't contradictory, and can coexist, i.e. country with nationalized institutions and social welfare where if you step out of line you're fucked (Nazi Germany and early Soviet Russia comes to mind)
It doesn't seem like the author has convinced himself, either. FTA:
I've seen a lot of organizations function with neither shared vision or a plan. I've yet to see a successful software project without both.
If you read all the way to the end, you'll realize it was just an attention-grabber intro that didn't get analyzed all that much (cue infoworld rubbing their hands together and grinning), and that he's just against managerial interference when a group of devs are working well together. Well, no shit...
Slashdot Mirror
Well if you zoom out one step, the filmmaker created this movie because he was offended by acts committed by Muslims around the world, which means Muslims were responsible for the film being made, which makes them guilty of fomenting blasphemy about their own religion, which makes them guilty of offending themselves, which makes them guilty of violence and killings. Then if you zoom out another step, those Muslims did those things because they were offended by non-Muslims doing things that were incompatible with Islam, which means non-Muslims were responsible for what those Muslims did, which was responsible for this guy making a movie about Mohammad, which was responsible for Muslim violence and killings we see today.
Eventually, you'd zoom out to the sun. Without the sun, trees would not have grown and ships would not have been built, and grass would not have grown and camels and horses would not have flourished, and people would never have traveled and different civilizations would never have known of each other's existence, and people in one region would have stayed in their respective caves and ate their fungi and worshiped their gods in isolated peace. So what's the point I'm trying to make here? We should have censored sunlight a long time ago.
So if some flag burners get shot by a militant nationalist, they bear some of the responsibility.
Do you also think the Norwegian Labor Party should be censored because a follower of Breivik's ideology might be offended by their stance on immigration, and go on another shooting spree because they see it as a message that embraces the destruction of their white race? After all, we have to appreciate the fact that the white nationalists likely perceive the pro-immigration message as a threat.
I meant to say "Being against exceedingly long copyright terms and being against copyright itself are two separate positions."
If you read OP's post, he says that eradication of crime was not the goal, but rather management of crime levels. This, in the context of our present article, means he obviously believes that eradication of piracy is not the goal of IP holders -- as is presume by many in these comments, but rather management of piracy levels. You responded to him in a oblique manner that sidestepped his point entirely.
On the issue of life long copyright, and its relevance to our discussion, I still stand by my initial post. 1.2k seeders and only 63 leechers are not going to be on anyone's radar when the greater context consists of https://thepiratebay.se/top/200 and https://thepiratebay.se/top/400
Being against exceedingly long copyright terms and being against copyright infringement are two separate positions. One can be for both, against both, or a combination of the two. What one cannot do is to conflate the two into a single argument.
Editors are the 1%, living off the revenue from the traffic generated by our typing, while doing no useful labor on their own.
DOWN WITH THE SYSTEM!
improve society
Minimizing crime to a reasonable level IS improving society. So your comment on that is not a rebuttal, but a banal restatement.
lifelong copyrights
I don't know why this is even part of the conversation. If you go on TPB or any other torrent site, you will be hard pressed to find anyone seeking old material whose only protection is lifelong copyright. The majority of copyright infringement is on the latest releases, so your argument against lifelong copyright, while sensible and appropriate in a general discussion on copyright law, is not relevant in the case of media piracy.
they keep making bad movies
I can understand how that can be a valid reason for people who pirate in order to "try before you buy," but in no way is that a valid reason for the multitude of other excuses.
Take evolution for example. I have rarely read or heard of scientists describing evolution in the most mundane but factually correct way -- the genetic change within a species resulting from natural selection*, a process that is merely the dying off of lineages that could not cope with the environmental conditions, or could not compete with other lineages -- except in textbooks. I do, however, remember guest scientists on documentaries and nature magazines wax poetically about a species' epic struggle of survival in a sea of hostility.
It's like they thought people would be too dumb to understand, so they preemptively dumbed it down, and now we wonder why people are still dumb. It's because YOU -- the only hope they had of being educated -- gave up.
*Notice also how experts do like to make up grandiose names that illicit the image of a supreme intelligence, like "natural SELECTION" and "the INVISIBLE HAND". That's not helping, either.
I'm pretty sure even with strict regulation of campaign finance, fraudsters would still use phishing scams like this.
And it's the first photo you see when you go on their website http://en.chinafotopress.com/
Probably some local Chinese photographer wanted a quick buck from some gullible Britons.
On the captions you see it's by China Photo Press/Barcroft Media, which means DailyMail bought them from 3rd party photo journalists, who obviously were looking for a quick sell and weren't concerned with some color enhancement. Here's a phone camera video taken yesterday http://v.youku.com/v_show/id_XNDQ3ODM2NDUy.html It's not as red as the photos, but still very red. The locals who are talking to the guy filming say it's the first time they've seen anything like this, so it's not a total fake either.
Wow, no joke, that's some shoddy PS job. Also the shore-side water in the background between the two men's heads. They forgot to paint that part.
A nobody coming from the very bottom will undoubtedly benefit from the publicity of doing something like this, because the rush of publicity and the sympathy money will make up for the low sales to download ratio. AAA developers will receive no sympathy, nor will they benefit from additional publicity on their already famous franchises, which means it won't work for them except to lower their revenue.
So, Pirate Bay make sense for upstarts, and that's about it.
It doesn't matter if Romney releases them now. It's too late to appease certain people. He didn't release them the moment his opponents called for them, which to some is a sign of guilt. We saw this 4 years ago. If Obama had released his birth certificate even just a week late, those among his opponents who had been clamoring to get at it would still have called it a forgery. If Romney were to ever release his personal tax documents, you can bet those clamoring to get at them will say it has been washed by a team of lawyers and accountants.
Politics today consists of partisan loudmouths bouncing off of each other, pulling the country further apart with ever more heated rhetoric and accusations. Democrats and Republicans alike will say it's the other side that does it. Those principled few among us, who can support the privacy of both these men, are cast as shills whenever convenient.
Very unexpected for a typically pessimistic crowd. Definitely bookmarking this thread for comparison when a Republican President posts his putting tips or something. I'll bet /. would pounce on that, but you never know... you guys have surprised me before.
What I meant was that slavery by Africans had no effect on the general progression of slavery in the world, because institutionalized slavery is ancient and it had tremendous inertia. The US was going to be a part of the Atlantic slave trade with or without African slave lords, in the same way that cyberattacks were going to happen with or without Stuxnet
Don't forget, once slavery got "legalized" by tribes in Africa, it became ok to trade slaves across the Atlantic. Oops, that reasoning doesn't work.
What makes you think people don't expect China or Russia to be "good guys" or that people expect the US to be "good guys"? Chinese, Russian, and American politicians all claim their country to be beacons of some sort, leaders in progress, yet you only hold one of them to that claim.
"America sets the example"? I can bet if we were talking about some positive aspect, you wouldn't use such egotistical US-centric rhetoric. The fact is those countries you listed would have done what they did no matter what, and used whatever excuse was convenient to them.
the Anon is absolutely right, though. Dinosaur is more of a catch-all term. Sure, evidence links many dinosaur species to modern birds, but there are many more without such links. Biology/paleontology is science, and its terminology IS NOT and SHOULD NOT change due to popular usage (or in this case, half-ignorant pseudo-intelligence).
If they fail and harm themselves as a result, the state should treat them - with group freedom comes group responsibility.
I know we want to have our cake and eat it too, but social programs aren't sustainable if personal behavior isn't regulated to some degree. It's sad to have to do it, but you just can't afford to piss off the responsible productive citizens who pay for it all by giving them nothing while they carry the burden of those who happily harm themselves. Unless, of course, you're willing to resort to soviet style emigration restrictions to prevent the inevitable human capital flight.
I see them both as moderates. Romney is pulled by the vocal (and more extreme) wing of his party, and forced to differentiate himself from a moderate Obama. When you must make yourself stand apart from the center, you have no choice but to go towards either wing, and as a Republican there is no place for him to go but to the right. It's tragic, really. You can tell that he's tired of going back on his word and his record as Governor, and that he lacks conviction when he panders to that faction. I'm quite hopeful that if he does win, he won't be keeping many promises to the Tea Party. Though, that's not a risk I'd like to take.
Socialism and Fascism aren't contradictory, and can coexist, i.e. country with nationalized institutions and social welfare where if you step out of line you're fucked (Nazi Germany and early Soviet Russia comes to mind)
It doesn't seem like the author has convinced himself, either.
FTA:
I've seen a lot of organizations function with neither shared vision or a plan. I've yet to see a successful software project without both.
If you read all the way to the end, you'll realize it was just an attention-grabber intro that didn't get analyzed all that much (cue infoworld rubbing their hands together and grinning), and that he's just against managerial interference when a group of devs are working well together. Well, no shit...
lol, if we burn down buildings they'd have to build new ones with more fire resistance. BRILLIANT!