Hollywood is missing out on a huge market. Movies such as V for Vendetta should be recut and released from the status quo's perspective.
In other words, there should be a Tyrant's Cut where Adam Sutler wins and single-handedly kills V. A recut of the Matrix trilogy where Neo is killed by Agent Smith. And maybe a recut of Eastwood's The Gauntlet where Clint and Sondra Locke are stopped and killed by the police.
Why is Hollywood ignoring this vast untapped market?
Here's a good article from Men's Journal (which can only be found on the internet archive) about the very sick and twisted way the NFL treats its players.
It's a good read, but you'll probably never watch the NFL the same way again.
Unfortunately, under the law as it is now, it probably is constitutional. The police can legally stop a vehicle for any valid traffic violation, even if the traffic stop is mere pretext. E.g., Whren v. U.S., U.S. Sup. Ct. 1996 or Arkansas v. Sullivan, U.S. Sup. Ct. 2001
I realize the likely illegally obtained pretext from NSA makes this different, but it's obviously never been tested in court. For a court to find it unconstitutional, it would have to disregard and overturn a ton of contrary caselaw which supports an officer's ability to stop vehicles for any valid traffic violation. I highly doubt the United States Supreme Court would, given its current makeup.
The problem I have with this is the argument that NSA spying should be stopped because abuses are inevitable. It's an empirical argument of the facts. But such a debate is meaningless.
NSA spying should not be stopped because it might one day be abused. NSA spying should be stopped because it is necessarily wrong. That's the end of the argument. It does not go past that.
It doesn't matter if the NSA actually stops a terrorist attack or not. It doesn't matter if the NSA never ever abuses the system. It's wrong. It must be stopped. Period.
As an attorney and with my unfortunate experience with the criminal justice system, I've noticed two types of lie detector advocates. The first type realize the tests are complete BS but skillfully use then to draw out confessions.
The second type are scary, they're absolute true believers. And like any true believer, they're dogmatic and prone to anger when confronted with actual verifiable evidence.
I'm assuming (based upon my own subjective opinion) that John Schwartz falls into the latter group.
"we used to be making a lot more money, they're making a lot of money now -- therefore, they must have taken "our" money."
I think it's actually worse. I think it's: "We used to be making a lot more money, they're making a lot of money now -- therefore, we must have their money."
As mentioned before, the copyright industry does not work in a free and open market. They don't care about competing or getting customers. They exist solely because the law says particular people have to pay. Because Google has money, the copyright industry has decided it should pay.
Think about it from the copyright industry's perspective. They're old men. They don't really understand the internet. And as far as they're concerned, Google is the internet. If that's true, well, make 'em pay, god damnit!
The point of GMO foods have nothing to do with higher yields or increasing quality. It's solely to do with patenting food. They're imagining a society where we have to pay patent licenses fee to live.
The forces behind GMO foods will never allow it to go open source. Never. Ever.
"In fact, he very clearly blames 9/11 on civil liberties advocates"
Baker's actually absolutely right. If this country had no civil liberties and was the police state he dreams about, Islamic militants never would have attacked us in the first place. They hate us for our freedom, right? Take away the freedom, you get rid of the hate.
So, do you watch yourself or do you have your own watcher? But then who watches him... Is there a never-ending chain of watchers watching other watchers? I suppose having other watchers watch the same other watchers could in theory break the chain...
My guess is that Hollywood and the RIAA are funding these AGs. They want a state exception to Section 230. Then they'll start suing Google for theft or misappropriation in state courts.
Can someone explain something to me. How is tracking everyone's phone calls supposed to stop terrorism when anyone can buy a private phone?
Last week I bought a TracFone for my son and got it working without ever having to provide any personal information. I bought it and the card with cash. And signed up for the service with a new email address.
There should be a cookie that indicates you already have a Netflix account so you'd get a different ad. Netflix is wasting a lot of money advertising to its own customers.
Well fucking duh. Of course taking away consumer rights increases profits. If that's the criteria we're going to use to decide how we enact and enforce our laws, we're totally fucked.
"The only one benefiting from used game sales are the scumbag stores who deal in it while destroying the industry."
People who do not sell their used game to GameStop benefit.
On the post: Reporter Toobin Lashes Out At Reporters Who Use 'Stolen' Documents; Leaves Out His Own History Of Doing The Same
Re: Posted before, but still relevant:
On the post: Reporter Toobin Lashes Out At Reporters Who Use 'Stolen' Documents; Leaves Out His Own History Of Doing The Same
On the post: Former Metropolitan Police Commissioner Says Anti-Terror Laws Should Be Used To Stop Investigative Journalism
In other words, there should be a Tyrant's Cut where Adam Sutler wins and single-handedly kills V. A recut of the Matrix trilogy where Neo is killed by Agent Smith. And maybe a recut of Eastwood's The Gauntlet where Clint and Sondra Locke are stopped and killed by the police.
Why is Hollywood ignoring this vast untapped market?
On the post: The NFL Will Feel The Streisand Effect After Pressuring ESPN To Pull Out Of Frontline Documentary
It's a good read, but you'll probably never watch the NFL the same way again.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070616092104/http://www.mensjournal.com/feature/M162/M162_Cas ualtiesoftheNFL.html
On the post: Was DEA's Fake Claims Of Not Being Able To Intercept iMessages Part Of Evidence Laundering Efforts?
Unfortunately, under the law as it is now, it probably is constitutional. The police can legally stop a vehicle for any valid traffic violation, even if the traffic stop is mere pretext. E.g., Whren v. U.S., U.S. Sup. Ct. 1996 or Arkansas v. Sullivan, U.S. Sup. Ct. 2001
I realize the likely illegally obtained pretext from NSA makes this different, but it's obviously never been tested in court. For a court to find it unconstitutional, it would have to disregard and overturn a ton of contrary caselaw which supports an officer's ability to stop vehicles for any valid traffic violation. I highly doubt the United States Supreme Court would, given its current makeup.
On the post: Vocal NSA Critic Has Dinner With NSA Boss, Explains To Him That Abuses Are Inevitable
NSA spying should not be stopped because it might one day be abused. NSA spying should be stopped because it is necessarily wrong. That's the end of the argument. It does not go past that.
It doesn't matter if the NSA actually stops a terrorist attack or not. It doesn't matter if the NSA never ever abuses the system. It's wrong. It must be stopped. Period.
On the post: Federal Official Declares That Anyone Who Speaks Out Against Lie Detector Tests Should Be Criminally Investigated
The second type are scary, they're absolute true believers. And like any true believer, they're dogmatic and prone to anger when confronted with actual verifiable evidence.
I'm assuming (based upon my own subjective opinion) that John Schwartz falls into the latter group.
On the post: Once Again: Just Because You Can Search For Infringing Content Via Search Engines Doesn't Mean Many People Do
I think it's actually worse. I think it's: "We used to be making a lot more money, they're making a lot of money now -- therefore, we must have their money."
As mentioned before, the copyright industry does not work in a free and open market. They don't care about competing or getting customers. They exist solely because the law says particular people have to pay. Because Google has money, the copyright industry has decided it should pay.
Think about it from the copyright industry's perspective. They're old men. They don't really understand the internet. And as far as they're concerned, Google is the internet. If that's true, well, make 'em pay, god damnit!
On the post: Could Open Source Make GMOs More Palatable?
The forces behind GMO foods will never allow it to go open source. Never. Ever.
On the post: Now That The Intelligence Community Got Away With Lying, How Can You Trust Anything They Say?
Of course if Clapper had lied and blew the whistle on his lying, he'd be locked in solitary right now.
On the post: President Obama: NSA Surveillance Was Necessary To Make Sure Boston Bombings Weren't Part Of Bigger Plot
On the post: Former Top NSA Lawyer Blames Civil Libertarians For 9/11, Says Hype About NSA May Lead To A Repeat
Baker's actually absolutely right. If this country had no civil liberties and was the police state he dreams about, Islamic militants never would have attacked us in the first place. They hate us for our freedom, right? Take away the freedom, you get rid of the hate.
On the post: Contractors Providing Background Checks For NSA Caught Falsifying Reports, Interviewing The Dead
Re: Re: Needed to be said...
On the post: Contractors Providing Background Checks For NSA Caught Falsifying Reports, Interviewing The Dead
Needed to be said...
On the post: Clueless State AGs Attack Google Over YouTube Videos Instead Of Pursuing The Criminals Who Made Them
Or the AGs are simply retarded attention whores.
On the post: University Of California's Latest Plan: Privatize Knowledge, Take Out Lots Of Patents -- Profit!
All of it.
"and how to structure licensing deals with private industry."
Draconian.
On the post: Shallow Surveillance Efforts Like PRISM Will Only Catch The 'Stupidest, Lowest-Ranking Of Terrorists'
Last week I bought a TracFone for my son and got it working without ever having to provide any personal information. I bought it and the card with cash. And signed up for the service with a new email address.
On the post: Company Claims Patent On Pop-Up Ads, Sues Porn & Travel Companies
There should be a cookie that indicates you already have a Netflix account so you'd get a different ad. Netflix is wasting a lot of money advertising to its own customers.
On the post: Microsoft's Attack On Used Game Sales Asks Customers To Sacrifice Their Rights To Save An Industry
Re: Worked for PCs
Well fucking duh. Of course taking away consumer rights increases profits. If that's the criteria we're going to use to decide how we enact and enforce our laws, we're totally fucked.
"The only one benefiting from used game sales are the scumbag stores who deal in it while destroying the industry."
People who do not sell their used game to GameStop benefit.
On the post: Microsoft's Attack On Used Game Sales Asks Customers To Sacrifice Their Rights To Save An Industry
Next >>