David Brin in his novel: Earth had some backstory (which is not in that link) about a war on the "Gnomes". This was a war on secrecy in banking. The story went along the lines of it was a purging moment in human history, in secrecy evil hides. Purging the "Gnomes" stripped a great deal of power from the corrupted mechanisms of society. Now, with that said any information collected will be abused but this offers some perspective.
I get ahead of myself all the time. If we were to return to an agrarian society obviously we would keep our essential systems and we would not need to stop collecting knowledge. But if Information technology spread throughout our society proves to be too much to manage as humans then we can adjust to the limits we can manage. Millions of years from now there may not be Gods walking the Earth but I have faith that we'll last for a few hundred-thousand at least living within our means. Determining our means will hurt but we have no other teacher than experience.
You are correct. The equilibrium may not be stable. It may be a form of perpetual chaos. That would be very bad. I tend to focus on the positive. I have faith that no matter what we can work through our challenges. Even if that means returning to an agrarian society. Incidentally, I do believe completely electronic will be where it settles: it is simply the most efficient use of resources to ignore.
Thats one way to look at Zen anyway, Japan realized it first but right now they also have a 99% conviction rate in their courts so they still have their own problems to work out... Anyway! Back on topic.
The matrix surrounds us, it penetrates us.... But it is not there, it is an illusion. The car is our society and we are but passengers. There are only atoms everything beyond that is an abstraction and therefore relative to everything else. When comparing abstractions you can establish equivalence. My brain causes my mind. My mind is in an abstract reality of its own. So is yours. They are examples of systems. So other systems also being abstract share a reality that is as valid as yours or mine but may be of a different degree of complexity. There is only dust, we, they, and it are metaphysical.
There is reason for hope however. Like all complex systems we will find a new equilibrium until something like this happens again. We are in the transition period right now into the Information Age. A new order will establish itself but because of the stochastic nature of the process we do not know what it will be. Also, there will be a much higher frequency of bifurcation throughout our fabric as a whole. But overall the equilibrium should be stable. If you knew where to look these things are apparent. I'm not being snide, I've read stuff and I'm sharing it with you to explore. Research and prove you are right too.
There is no dilemma, there is only change. The Internet is a tsunami that is roaring over all aspects of our society. In the content industries it is clearing land for some while washing away the livelihoods of others. It is a force of its own. You can manage somewhat as you go but one thing is certain: it is now impossible to stop it, we have passed the tipping point. You might as well curse the wind, or you could adjust your sails to the best of your abilities.
I want freedom too. However when you are making your case before a Judge you need to have all the cards on your side. Or you will not enact the change you desire. Boycotting is the answer, but, today it is ineffective because of lack of organization and common cause. It can be made better so to solve the issues I propose we begin with debate to define them, establish a common set of values and principles to guide them, be a proponent of a common cause people can organize around, and take what is ours.
I do believe that boycotting is the answer to change our broken copyright system. To make it effective people need to understand the issue and have a common cause. Otherwise boycotting will also not work. There IS a problem. People are stealing all the time. I don't want to hide my head in the sand any longer. I want to get to the root of the issue so I can then use those truths to educate my friends and family. Help me accomplish this.
Because with a boycott you remove any suggestion of selfish motives from the equation. That would keep you from being in front a judge right off the bat but even if it didn't no-one would be able to question that you acted out of virtue and demonstrated nobility.
If the situation was one-on-one then not doing the work until paid would be the pragmatic choice. However, with multiple parties some will pay and some will not but the work was still performed. The worker still has to buy food, is it fair to deprive them of quality of life they had the potential to acquire from their efforts? I will stand by my belief that we need copyright, however, if you can invalidate capitalism then I will expire copyright.
You wish you could twist the eloquence and express yourself with a veracity I exhibit to my peers. I am grown up. When I was a child I played with childish things, now that I am an adult I have put them away and I play with concepts. You should do the same, it would improve your lot as a person.
Exactly so if we reach a fair and balanced consensus as citizens discussing issues of importance to ourselves, say what the exact term of copyright should be. In our court that is. So, you could then apply this vigilante argument to your actions and only download works older than the fair term. If you happen to be caught and prosecuted you produce a record of the totality of your reasoning including logic, values, history, and motivations - this civil discourse. When you are in a legal court, for now, your rights as a citizen would mean it would all have to be worked through before they could convict you under anything but politics. Thats activism.
Here is the issue of right and wrong. It takes effort to produce a work. It does not matter if that effort can be replicated infinitely, what you are stealing is the effort, the chain of money that leads back to someone paying their rent. Or buying a house. In a wider context, once we have found a suitable replacement for capitalism itself then we can invalidate things that make it go such as copyright.
If you had a time machine and knew before the fact I'd let the bastard die. But from the present, you can't judge what is only potential. And no matter how horrific the events if they had not happened we would not have (hopefully) learned their lessons.
The stand is hypocritical: people should be boycotting instead of stealing, but boycotting is ineffective... That's where people start to exhibit their passion.
You are now officially in charge of that branch! Please sub-delegate your individual points. Each of us can only do so much but collectively we can chip anything away!
If you don't have something to contribute you can always criticize where you know opinions are wrong! And I'm not being snide, that is an essential thing to do: how else are we to improve our arguments?
Slashdot Mirror
David Brin in his novel: Earth had some backstory (which is not in that link) about a war on the "Gnomes". This was a war on secrecy in banking. The story went along the lines of it was a purging moment in human history, in secrecy evil hides. Purging the "Gnomes" stripped a great deal of power from the corrupted mechanisms of society. Now, with that said any information collected will be abused but this offers some perspective.
I get ahead of myself all the time. If we were to return to an agrarian society obviously we would keep our essential systems and we would not need to stop collecting knowledge. But if Information technology spread throughout our society proves to be too much to manage as humans then we can adjust to the limits we can manage. Millions of years from now there may not be Gods walking the Earth but I have faith that we'll last for a few hundred-thousand at least living within our means. Determining our means will hurt but we have no other teacher than experience.
You are correct. The equilibrium may not be stable. It may be a form of perpetual chaos. That would be very bad. I tend to focus on the positive. I have faith that no matter what we can work through our challenges. Even if that means returning to an agrarian society. Incidentally, I do believe completely electronic will be where it settles: it is simply the most efficient use of resources to ignore.
Thats one way to look at Zen anyway, Japan realized it first but right now they also have a 99% conviction rate in their courts so they still have their own problems to work out... Anyway! Back on topic.
Forgive me while I stare at a shiny.
The matrix surrounds us, it penetrates us.... But it is not there, it is an illusion. The car is our society and we are but passengers. There are only atoms everything beyond that is an abstraction and therefore relative to everything else. When comparing abstractions you can establish equivalence. My brain causes my mind. My mind is in an abstract reality of its own. So is yours. They are examples of systems. So other systems also being abstract share a reality that is as valid as yours or mine but may be of a different degree of complexity. There is only dust, we, they, and it are metaphysical.
There is reason for hope however. Like all complex systems we will find a new equilibrium until something like this happens again. We are in the transition period right now into the Information Age. A new order will establish itself but because of the stochastic nature of the process we do not know what it will be. Also, there will be a much higher frequency of bifurcation throughout our fabric as a whole. But overall the equilibrium should be stable. If you knew where to look these things are apparent. I'm not being snide, I've read stuff and I'm sharing it with you to explore. Research and prove you are right too.
There is no dilemma, there is only change. The Internet is a tsunami that is roaring over all aspects of our society. In the content industries it is clearing land for some while washing away the livelihoods of others. It is a force of its own. You can manage somewhat as you go but one thing is certain: it is now impossible to stop it, we have passed the tipping point. You might as well curse the wind, or you could adjust your sails to the best of your abilities.
I want freedom too. However when you are making your case before a Judge you need to have all the cards on your side. Or you will not enact the change you desire. Boycotting is the answer, but, today it is ineffective because of lack of organization and common cause. It can be made better so to solve the issues I propose we begin with debate to define them, establish a common set of values and principles to guide them, be a proponent of a common cause people can organize around, and take what is ours.
Off the cuff, so if your employer said: "You only need $500 a week to get by..." Would you still agree with what you said?
I do believe that boycotting is the answer to change our broken copyright system. To make it effective people need to understand the issue and have a common cause. Otherwise boycotting will also not work. There IS a problem. People are stealing all the time. I don't want to hide my head in the sand any longer. I want to get to the root of the issue so I can then use those truths to educate my friends and family. Help me accomplish this.
Because with a boycott you remove any suggestion of selfish motives from the equation. That would keep you from being in front a judge right off the bat but even if it didn't no-one would be able to question that you acted out of virtue and demonstrated nobility.
If the situation was one-on-one then not doing the work until paid would be the pragmatic choice. However, with multiple parties some will pay and some will not but the work was still performed. The worker still has to buy food, is it fair to deprive them of quality of life they had the potential to acquire from their efforts? I will stand by my belief that we need copyright, however, if you can invalidate capitalism then I will expire copyright.
You wish you could twist the eloquence and express yourself with a veracity I exhibit to my peers. I am grown up. When I was a child I played with childish things, now that I am an adult I have put them away and I play with concepts. You should do the same, it would improve your lot as a person.
Exactly so if we reach a fair and balanced consensus as citizens discussing issues of importance to ourselves, say what the exact term of copyright should be. In our court that is. So, you could then apply this vigilante argument to your actions and only download works older than the fair term. If you happen to be caught and prosecuted you produce a record of the totality of your reasoning including logic, values, history, and motivations - this civil discourse. When you are in a legal court, for now, your rights as a citizen would mean it would all have to be worked through before they could convict you under anything but politics. Thats activism.
Here is the issue of right and wrong. It takes effort to produce a work. It does not matter if that effort can be replicated infinitely, what you are stealing is the effort, the chain of money that leads back to someone paying their rent. Or buying a house. In a wider context, once we have found a suitable replacement for capitalism itself then we can invalidate things that make it go such as copyright.
If you had a time machine and knew before the fact I'd let the bastard die. But from the present, you can't judge what is only potential. And no matter how horrific the events if they had not happened we would not have (hopefully) learned their lessons.
Bwaha! Now you deserve a +5 Funny for coming out of left field!
The stand is hypocritical: people should be boycotting instead of stealing, but boycotting is ineffective... That's where people start to exhibit their passion.
And Black heroine? 1925? That should be public domain.
Perhaps some are seeing sense more than others and starting to actually value their customers.
I do, its the public domain. I have had things stolen from me that could and should have been: secondary works.
If it applies to the GPL it applies to Microsoft too.
Thats why we have to hold "them" (whoever they may be) to the task with the tools at our disposal.
You are now officially in charge of that branch! Please sub-delegate your individual points. Each of us can only do so much but collectively we can chip anything away!
If you don't have something to contribute you can always criticize where you know opinions are wrong! And I'm not being snide, that is an essential thing to do: how else are we to improve our arguments?