Without copyright, artists would be living in gutters like Edgar Allan Poe used to do.
Anecdotal evidence is no evidence at all in this case, or we can say that without copyright, artists would be bathing in money, like George Frideric Handel used to do.
Or it could be that a bunch of TV people, including important ones, got their balls handled and took it personally, just like pretty much everyone who went through it.
If you are talking specifically about the war logs and the cables, then your analogy is way off. Some of the latter had the Secret classification, but none of that stuff was secret in any normal sense of the word. 2.8 million people have access to Secret level, 800000 have access to Top Secret. These are not secret from anyone but the democratically represented public: the same people who can only use this information in a peaceful and constructive manner, buy making informed political decisions. Other governments already have all of these documents. Well-funded or well-connected organizations, terrorist or not, already have all of these documents. If any PFC can just walk in and get all of this shit while listening to Lady Gaga, then none of this is secret and hasn't been secret for years.
Basically, the US intelligence got caught with their pants down. The cannot prevent other big players (governments, corporations, terrorists) from knowing their political intentions, but until now they managed to keep just one very important player in the dark: the US public. We may disagree on whether people like Bradley Manning are heroes or villains, but any argument against what Wikileaks is doing is an argument directed against free press and for arbitrary censorship.
There can be no kill switch for Internet in US. We are talking the same government here that cannot shut down a weed store downtown San Francisco. They will never be able to convince all cable owners to turn off one thing that makes telcos indispensable from the point of view of their customers.
DNS is just the most convenient way to resolve literal names, but it is not the only one. The only way to stop people copying data over Internet is by unplugging all cables in between.
Non-commercial copying, yes. I mean, come on, they are making RECORD PROFITS while more people infringe than ever before, and it makes perfect sense because no one is averse to paying for art, although plenty of people are FED UP with DRM and unsolicited ads. And while I believe that ALL copyright is bad, if we could just legalize non-fucking-commercial copying (if only because it is, in fact, unstoppable), we would move on to a more humane society with MORE art available to EVERYONE.
Spammers are anonymous, in spite of an earnest international effort to unmask them. Going after Wikileaks is HILARIOUSLY pointless, since the leaks will still be released, now unedited, by people who are PERFECTLY anonymous. They will sign them with strong encryption to claim fame in perpetuity: more than enough incentive to publish this shit.
Give thinking a try. Having firepower is not the same as being able to
deploy it in the way you describe. The leaks continue for no reason other than the existence of Internet. No one can stop leaks now, NO ONE. I
t's just that disgustingly easy to leak info now while remaining anonymous. US military leakers (citation needed, btw) will die in prison, right, just like the guy who leaked the Pentagon papers did. Dude, seriously, the only reason Manning got caught was because he wanted fame: he was spilling his guts to a black hat named Lamo, for chrissake. Get a clue. The only fallout from the Manning incident is going to be this: no
other leaker will get caught unless they really want to.
I am no hater of Google, and neither am I an ill-wisher. We do need an online shopping catalog, and if Google can be good at that, then more power to them. They do, however, seem to be losing ground in the war with rank gamers, and they are beset from all sides by narrowly specialized competitors who index tiny portions of Internet, but do a way better job at that.
You are correct, of course. I did not mean to say that he has special beef with US, I do not believe that. I just chose War Logs and Cables as an example.
For the record, I do recommend torrenting, since it is a cheap and efficient way to transmit information. You seem to be implying that torrenting equals breaking the law, but that is simply incorrect.
It is also a hard fact that for many, many people, even here in the US, the risk of getting into trouble as a result of non-commercial copying is non-existent. I do not recommend that anyone actually break the law, I am just of the opinion that the copyright and the patent laws are unjust, oppressive to human spirit, in direct conflict with our right to free expression, economically damaging, and ineffective. They do slow down the production of copies, but only relative to the hypothetical world without copyright: if you compare now and 30 years ago, you see that the public is in the copying frenzy now, and the laws are powerless to stop it.
Anyone who believes for a moment that a universal patent law improves the rate of innovation or that a universal copyright law improves the rate at which art is being made accessible to public is living in a fantasy land.
Patents and copyrights are vestiges of the dictatorial power of a state to censor everything and everyone. The only time patents are useful is when they enable brain drain: craftsmen moving from Europe to America, seduced by promises monopoly profits. The copyrights are NEVER useful to the public, as they only prevent material from being published, even non-commercially. Abolish them, and people will still create a shit-ton of art, and it will be ALL ONLINE, all of it, at the same low price for everyone. This is a thought experiment even a retard can carry out.
Wow, learn to troll. Start by trying to say something at least remotely related to my post. I am not trying to thwart anything. So far, I did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to prevent my SSN from being published. There is nothing I can do. Millions of people can get my real name in seconds, and my credit report in minutes. I am not freaking out, you are!
I love it when people get upset at the "information wants to be free" adage, but I don't even think it's very wise. The real kicker is that, thanks to Internet, information is in fact free for most intents and purposes. The risk of getting into trouble is absolutely negligible, and it will only get smaller as the pipes get thicker and copying gets cheaper. And they will get thicker and cheaper, even though Internet's performance level is already obscene when compared to the time most of us were born into.
If 10 more pop up then those people will be tracked down and murdered until people get the picture that if you leak you die.
Wrong AGAIN. People who leak are completely safe as long as they don't talk to Adrian Lamo (by the way, the best snitch name ever). Chasing down journalists does absolutely nothing to address the source of the leak and the inherent leakiness of ANYTHING that is digitized and accessible to a few thousand people. War Logs and Cables were Secret and were legally accessible by 2.8 million people. FSB could go ahead and kill everyone who ever wrote a word for El País (Spain), Le Monde (France), Der Spiegel (Germany), The Guardian (United Kingdom), The New York Times (United States), and Wikileaks (Earth), and the very next day more shit will be leaked by their own employees and publicised on Internet by Anonymous. Good luck tracking that guy.
Hahahahaha, everything you say is true. These clowns cannot even shut down http://thepiratebay.org/ after years and years of litigation and actually throwing individual people in jail. The media shitstorm around Wikileaks is getting more amusing every hour. Say what you want about Assange, but if his goal was to draw attention to factual info leaked into the wild by US government employees, then he succeeded beyond even his own wildest dreams.
Most likely, life div[sic] evolve multiple times on earth
I don't think we have enough evidence for a probability claim. All we know is that life arose at least once via a process not at all understood. I am ready to believe that the familiar carbon-based life evolved in other places independently, just because of the sheer size of the universe and its apparent homogeneity, but it's just too early to say how often.
IANOP, but this galaxy is 90% dark matter is just another way of saying that the amount of matter visible to us as stars and interstellar gas is dreadfully insufficient to account for how this galaxy rotates, even if we generously account for very dim collapsed stars and stellar black holes, for as many of them as we think have appeared since the Big Bang. Either General Relativity is wrong on a galactic scale, or there is a crap-ton of matter hanging out there that does not produce, block, or reflect any light. The "visible" matter is mainly just stars and interstellar gas, and is composed of familiar protons, neutrons, and electrons. Dark matter, whatever it is, is probably radically different from anything we've encountered so far, although alternative laws of gravity and halos of massive dark objects such as black holes are not totally ruled out.
Meh. It looks like the average American is either as well as he used to be a couple of decades ago, or slightly worse off. IMHO, most Americans are still doing really well by the world standards.
Please explain why you singled out Assange for something that Wikileaks is doing along with El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times.
Exposing intelligence sources is never acceptable.
The leak source was probably a US government employee. It was that person who exposed intelligence sources: a US government employee. Wikileaks, along with other journalistic outlets, is bringing an edited version to the general public. They are not exposing ANYTHING. We, the public, are precisely LAST to read the leaked documents. Closing down newspapers won't stop leaks: it won't even stop them from reaching the public; it will only prevent them from being edited.
Ooookay. And El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times, who published the same documents at the same time, are not simply anti-US organizations? Why?
The leak probably came from a US government employee whose only goal was to publicize as widely as possible. If Wikileaks was not there to provide its journalistic services, someone else would step in. The information would still leak and get copied over the net. All the interested parties would already have it: governments, criminals. In short., everyone but the US public would already have it. And without editorial services currently provided by Wikileaks, the data blob would be unedited and verbatim. Does this look like a better outcome?
Stop pretending that Wikileaks does anything important beyond editing. They do not leak: they don't have to. It is ABSOLUTELY TRIVIAL to transfer 100 GB of arbitrary digital data between any two internet-enabled countries, and do so in a way that is undetectable. Want to get rid of journalism? Go ahead, it won't stop leaks, it will simply make them raw, since you removed the only party that gives a damn about editing. We can see right now how much the US government—which happens to be the likely source of the leak—cares about these documents hurting people. They simply don't. For all they care, these documents were already leaked and in the wild by the time Wikileaks got them, so whitewashing them now for the general public won't make any difference. Anyone with an interest already purchased a raw version.
Slashdot Mirror
Without copyright, artists would be living in gutters like Edgar Allan Poe used to do.
Anecdotal evidence is no evidence at all in this case, or we can say that without copyright, artists would be bathing in money, like George Frideric Handel used to do.
Or it could be that a bunch of TV people, including important ones, got their balls handled and took it personally, just like pretty much everyone who went through it.
If you are talking specifically about the war logs and the cables, then your analogy is way off. Some of the latter had the Secret classification, but none of that stuff was secret in any normal sense of the word. 2.8 million people have access to Secret level, 800000 have access to Top Secret. These are not secret from anyone but the democratically represented public: the same people who can only use this information in a peaceful and constructive manner, buy making informed political decisions. Other governments already have all of these documents. Well-funded or well-connected organizations, terrorist or not, already have all of these documents. If any PFC can just walk in and get all of this shit while listening to Lady Gaga, then none of this is secret and hasn't been secret for years.
Basically, the US intelligence got caught with their pants down. The cannot prevent other big players (governments, corporations, terrorists) from knowing their political intentions, but until now they managed to keep just one very important player in the dark: the US public. We may disagree on whether people like Bradley Manning are heroes or villains, but any argument against what Wikileaks is doing is an argument directed against free press and for arbitrary censorship.
There can be no kill switch for Internet in US. We are talking the same government here that cannot shut down a weed store downtown San Francisco. They will never be able to convince all cable owners to turn off one thing that makes telcos indispensable from the point of view of their customers.
DNS is just the most convenient way to resolve literal names, but it is not the only one. The only way to stop people copying data over Internet is by unplugging all cables in between.
copying has almost no effect on product sales.
Non-commercial copying, yes. I mean, come on, they are making RECORD PROFITS while more people infringe than ever before, and it makes perfect sense because no one is averse to paying for art, although plenty of people are FED UP with DRM and unsolicited ads. And while I believe that ALL copyright is bad, if we could just legalize non-fucking-commercial copying (if only because it is, in fact, unstoppable), we would move on to a more humane society with MORE art available to EVERYONE.
You twisted my arm. torrentz.com
Spammers are anonymous, in spite of an earnest international effort to unmask them. Going after Wikileaks is HILARIOUSLY pointless, since the leaks will still be released, now unedited, by people who are PERFECTLY anonymous. They will sign them with strong encryption to claim fame in perpetuity: more than enough incentive to publish this shit.
Give thinking a try. Having firepower is not the same as being able to deploy it in the way you describe. The leaks continue for no reason other than the existence of Internet. No one can stop leaks now, NO ONE. I t's just that disgustingly easy to leak info now while remaining anonymous. US military leakers (citation needed, btw) will die in prison, right, just like the guy who leaked the Pentagon papers did. Dude, seriously, the only reason Manning got caught was because he wanted fame: he was spilling his guts to a black hat named Lamo, for chrissake. Get a clue. The only fallout from the Manning incident is going to be this: no other leaker will get caught unless they really want to.
I am no hater of Google, and neither am I an ill-wisher. We do need an online shopping catalog, and if Google can be good at that, then more power to them. They do, however, seem to be losing ground in the war with rank gamers, and they are beset from all sides by narrowly specialized competitors who index tiny portions of Internet, but do a way better job at that.
You are correct, of course. I did not mean to say that he has special beef with US, I do not believe that. I just chose War Logs and Cables as an example.
For the record, I do recommend torrenting, since it is a cheap and efficient way to transmit information. You seem to be implying that torrenting equals breaking the law, but that is simply incorrect.
It is also a hard fact that for many, many people, even here in the US, the risk of getting into trouble as a result of non-commercial copying is non-existent. I do not recommend that anyone actually break the law, I am just of the opinion that the copyright and the patent laws are unjust, oppressive to human spirit, in direct conflict with our right to free expression, economically damaging, and ineffective. They do slow down the production of copies, but only relative to the hypothetical world without copyright: if you compare now and 30 years ago, you see that the public is in the copying frenzy now, and the laws are powerless to stop it.
Anyone who believes for a moment that a universal patent law improves the rate of innovation or that a universal copyright law improves the rate at which art is being made accessible to public is living in a fantasy land.
Patents and copyrights are vestiges of the dictatorial power of a state to censor everything and everyone. The only time patents are useful is when they enable brain drain: craftsmen moving from Europe to America, seduced by promises monopoly profits. The copyrights are NEVER useful to the public, as they only prevent material from being published, even non-commercially. Abolish them, and people will still create a shit-ton of art, and it will be ALL ONLINE, all of it, at the same low price for everyone. This is a thought experiment even a retard can carry out.
Wow, learn to troll. Start by trying to say something at least remotely related to my post. I am not trying to thwart anything. So far, I did ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to prevent my SSN from being published. There is nothing I can do. Millions of people can get my real name in seconds, and my credit report in minutes. I am not freaking out, you are!
I love it when people get upset at the "information wants to be free" adage, but I don't even think it's very wise. The real kicker is that, thanks to Internet, information is in fact free for most intents and purposes. The risk of getting into trouble is absolutely negligible, and it will only get smaller as the pipes get thicker and copying gets cheaper. And they will get thicker and cheaper, even though Internet's performance level is already obscene when compared to the time most of us were born into.
If 10 more pop up then those people will be tracked down and murdered until people get the picture that if you leak you die.
Wrong AGAIN. People who leak are completely safe as long as they don't talk to Adrian Lamo (by the way, the best snitch name ever). Chasing down journalists does absolutely nothing to address the source of the leak and the inherent leakiness of ANYTHING that is digitized and accessible to a few thousand people. War Logs and Cables were Secret and were legally accessible by 2.8 million people. FSB could go ahead and kill everyone who ever wrote a word for El País (Spain), Le Monde (France), Der Spiegel (Germany), The Guardian (United Kingdom), The New York Times (United States), and Wikileaks (Earth), and the very next day more shit will be leaked by their own employees and publicised on Internet by Anonymous. Good luck tracking that guy.
Google search is basically a shopping catalog now. Here is where you go when you want INFORMATION:
When torrent sites go
Hahahahaha, everything you say is true. These clowns cannot even shut down http://thepiratebay.org/ after years and years of litigation and actually throwing individual people in jail. The media shitstorm around Wikileaks is getting more amusing every hour. Say what you want about Assange, but if his goal was to draw attention to factual info leaked into the wild by US government employees, then he succeeded beyond even his own wildest dreams.
Most likely, life div[sic] evolve multiple times on earth
I don't think we have enough evidence for a probability claim. All we know is that life arose at least once via a process not at all understood. I am ready to believe that the familiar carbon-based life evolved in other places independently, just because of the sheer size of the universe and its apparent homogeneity, but it's just too early to say how often.
IANOP, but this galaxy is 90% dark matter is just another way of saying that the amount of matter visible to us as stars and interstellar gas is dreadfully insufficient to account for how this galaxy rotates, even if we generously account for very dim collapsed stars and stellar black holes, for as many of them as we think have appeared since the Big Bang. Either General Relativity is wrong on a galactic scale, or there is a crap-ton of matter hanging out there that does not produce, block, or reflect any light. The "visible" matter is mainly just stars and interstellar gas, and is composed of familiar protons, neutrons, and electrons. Dark matter, whatever it is, is probably radically different from anything we've encountered so far, although alternative laws of gravity and halos of massive dark objects such as black holes are not totally ruled out.
You are not puny. ~Jon Stewart
"7h3j3573r" is still super-lame compared to "73|-|_|3$73®"
Meh. It looks like the average American is either as well as he used to be a couple of decades ago, or slightly worse off. IMHO, most Americans are still doing really well by the world standards.
Assange thinks he is more important than he is.
Please explain why you singled out Assange for something that Wikileaks is doing along with El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times.
Exposing intelligence sources is never acceptable.
The leak source was probably a US government employee. It was that person who exposed intelligence sources: a US government employee. Wikileaks, along with other journalistic outlets, is bringing an edited version to the general public. They are not exposing ANYTHING. We, the public, are precisely LAST to read the leaked documents. Closing down newspapers won't stop leaks: it won't even stop them from reaching the public; it will only prevent them from being edited.
Ooookay. And El Pais, Le Monde, Der Spiegel, The Guardian, and The New York Times, who published the same documents at the same time, are not simply anti-US organizations? Why?
The leak probably came from a US government employee whose only goal was to publicize as widely as possible. If Wikileaks was not there to provide its journalistic services, someone else would step in. The information would still leak and get copied over the net. All the interested parties would already have it: governments, criminals. In short., everyone but the US public would already have it. And without editorial services currently provided by Wikileaks, the data blob would be unedited and verbatim. Does this look like a better outcome?
Stop pretending that Wikileaks does anything important beyond editing. They do not leak: they don't have to. It is ABSOLUTELY TRIVIAL to transfer 100 GB of arbitrary digital data between any two internet-enabled countries, and do so in a way that is undetectable. Want to get rid of journalism? Go ahead, it won't stop leaks, it will simply make them raw, since you removed the only party that gives a damn about editing. We can see right now how much the US government—which happens to be the likely source of the leak—cares about these documents hurting people. They simply don't. For all they care, these documents were already leaked and in the wild by the time Wikileaks got them, so whitewashing them now for the general public won't make any difference. Anyone with an interest already purchased a raw version.
Once the trigger is pulled and the round leaves the barrel, a computer chip inside the projectile
People don't kill people. Bullets kill people. Or is it bullet programmers that kill people? This is only going to get more confusing, folks.