"Some people are very, very obviously more special than others."
Please, tell me you are kidding.
There's something thing called "talent", and everyone is more talented in certain areas than others. But that's how we compliment one another. It sure as shootin' doesn't make anyone "special".
To me, "special" is the retarded child, the autistic child, the handicapped person who still finds a way to excel in some field - now that is special.
And just for the record, I admire talent. I love to listen to a good singer. I couldn't carry a tune in a bucket! I love watching a good dancer because I dance about as good as Elaine on Seinfeld. I admire people who are mathematically inclined because I stink at math.
But because these people have a talent in a specific area, by no means does that make them "special". Get over yourself and join us in the real world...
Re: Re: Re: Re: learn history, find out about Bible 'Copyright'
Right - that's my point! And I see your point completely.
But by doing what they're doing, they are claiming that every digital file of every song that MAY be shared should be paid for somehow, no matter that it doesn't cost the artist one extra red cent, nor even an ounce of effort... or that us little peons out here shouldn't be able to do what human nature inclines us to often do - share what we have with others. That's the point I'm trying to make.
And, human nature being what it is, people are always going to want to purchase those hard copies of things they really enjoy, too. Artists make money in so many, many ways that I cannot help but believe this whole, invasive attack on such a simple and otherwise innocent act called sharing is morally wrong and totally illogical.
The more they continue their power grab, the more they push people to do the very thing they don't care for.
No one should care any more about my sharing a digital file than they do if I share a sandwich. Both acts are sharing. Sharing is not criminal. Sharing is not a bad thing.
And regarding that restaurant; gospel truth, my niece told a waitress recently she would share my soda with me, since neither of us wanted much. She was flat out told by the waitress, "NO SHARING IS ALLOWED".
But the restaurant would have been paid for that 1 soda whether her and I shared it or I drank the whole dang thing by myself, as you agreed, so you see, it's happening already. The ramifications of this insanity...
Gee. I've been watching protesters in my state trash our beloved capitol IN THE FLESH. They smoked dope, drank and got sick all over it for a month, they had children under the age of 15 involved in all of this - and none of that occurred on the Internet. I could go on and on but the point is, the way you're talking you'd think no crime exists outside the Internet.
I've read and seen copies of the death threats hand delivered to my state Senators (all by dems, I might add just for brevity).
I have watched union thugs bully and riot small businesses on city streets all across my state - none of that involved the internet.
I feel much safer online than I do walking or driving our illegal/gang/union thug-infested streets these days.
I wish we'd put more of this time, money and effort into fighting REAL crime, not little kiddies who make a COPY of a song...just sayin'.
vevaelamor, I didn't "attack" anyone's gender or masculinity. But if you really want to pick this apart it's a compliment to males.
You see, I generally find men are more likely to use logic and reason over emotion and/or hysteria. Women, on the other hand, do the opposite, often responding out of emotion, which is the way darryl sounded in that post - emotional.
It's truly that simple. One post, one observation on that one post. That's all.
And now haven't we gotten off topic quite enough? Quite frankly, the whole thing seems silly.
Well. Let's see. First, my observation was based on the simple fact that the shrill and hysterical rantings of Darryl remind me of women going off the deep end - or PMS'ing or something. (Well, you asked.)
It wasn't an "angle" I took, it was a simple observation.
"Or are you projecting your own fear of being different into an insult against darryl's presumed sense of masculinity? "
HUH? *scratches head*
I never heard of "Monkey Island" so you lost me on that one, sorry.
Re: Re: Re: Many to many ??? (what like a world war ?)
Would you please write all my common council members darryl? Every time they want to do something in the city they run around the state looking at examples in other cities and I'm quite tired of my taxes paying for all this copy-cat behavior and the road trips.
You see, they can't understand logic like yours in that by using others experiences and work for examples to learn what works and what doesn't, and/or for inspiration, they are COPYING therefore STEALING. For crying all night, they just cannot be original!!!
Really ticks me off because they're using my tax dollars to pull stunts like this! Of all the unmitigated gall, huh? (Ahem)
Look up the word "copy": an imitation, reproduction, or transcript of an original.
It's not criminal, nor is it "illegal" to copy. Well, some WANT it to be but you can put it on paper all you want, you're not going to alter human nature. Can't be done.
If you find an original Picasso and you take that original piece of art work without paying you're stealing. Agree?
But if a student of art practices their skills and paints a pretty good replica of a Picasso painting, how is that "stealing"? Experts know an original and always will.
The copy, on the other hand, will never have any serious value. And the artists knows that. Seems so elementary IMHO...
Curious ... Do you think every Elvis impersonator should be arrested for "copyright infringement" because they copied the likeness of another human being's existence?
Re: Re: Re: From the You're-Still-Full-Of-Shit-Department
WHOA! Goodness Mike, you're better than I realized! When you can strike a nerve that elicits that kind of reaction, you're really making an impact! Go, Mike, GO! ;)
"at least your racest and elitest and sexist tendencies are being displayed now Mike."
@darryl - that is really close to defamation. Defamation is against the law.
Now, I COULD do what loonies always do; pick on spelling 'cuz you see, it's not "racest" it's "racist", but I guess I won't bother to "go there". Darryl is upset enough ... deep breathes, Darryl...don't want you to have an apoplexy.
Re: Re: learn history, find out about Bible 'Copyright'
Those "laws" were made by tyrannical humans, not by the original authors of the Bible. Those tyrants had no rights to the Bible to do that, which is why those "laws" didn't work out too well.
The Bible was meant to be shared - OMG DOES IT ENCOURAGE STEALING? Of course not, because you can never alter who the original creators are, no more than you can alter God Himself whether you believe or don't believe, share the word or don't share the word.
Which I do, by the way, which means I don't believe in stealing but I sure as shootin' believe in sharing.
If I see a hungry homeless man sitting outside a restaurant and I go in, order my meal, set aside half my sandwich in a napkin, eat my fill, go outside and give that other half to the hungry homeless man. Did I just embark upon an act of kindness? Or have I just "stolen" from the restaurant because the homeless man didn't pay for that part of the sandwich? Of course not, I paid for it. I just SHARED it.
Or do you think the homeless man should go in and pay for "his share"? Isn't that a double-do? What if I shared it with 3 homeless people? Should the restaurant then get paid 4 times - for one meal? They didn't need more ingredients, more supplies, more electricity, more chef's etc., to "create" anything new.
Now some of you may think that's a ridiculous analogy but before you go off half cocked, give it some thought because that's the road we're heading on with all this nonsense of "sharing is stealing". Sharing is part and parcel of a good human beings human nature.
And what would a cold hearted, greedy person do? They'd look at the homeless man and think "BUM! Wish those vagrants wouldn't exist!" Or something along those lines...like some of you "haters" here act.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copyright forever
Please, tell me you are kidding.
There's something thing called "talent", and everyone is more talented in certain areas than others. But that's how we compliment one another. It sure as shootin' doesn't make anyone "special".
To me, "special" is the retarded child, the autistic child, the handicapped person who still finds a way to excel in some field - now that is special.
And just for the record, I admire talent. I love to listen to a good singer. I couldn't carry a tune in a bucket! I love watching a good dancer because I dance about as good as Elaine on Seinfeld. I admire people who are mathematically inclined because I stink at math.
But because these people have a talent in a specific area, by no means does that make them "special". Get over yourself and join us in the real world...
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are you crazy???
A copy is a copy is a copy is a copy and a copy never has the value of an original.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: From the You're-Still-Full-Of-Shit-Department
Ha ha ha ho ho ho don't y'all just love it? (I didn't copy! I switched the "ho" and the "ha").
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are you crazy???
And big pharm and their viagra couldn't exist to make their fortunes...they ought to be on their knees in gratitude.
On the post: Congress Folds: Extends Controversial & Likely Abused PATRIOT Act Provisions For 4 More Years
Sigh.
Well, a gal can still dream, right? Or is that "copyright prohibited" now too?
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re: Re: here is your Wild Wild West Mike
Uh oh. Marxist alert.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: learn history, find out about Bible 'Copyright'
But by doing what they're doing, they are claiming that every digital file of every song that MAY be shared should be paid for somehow, no matter that it doesn't cost the artist one extra red cent, nor even an ounce of effort... or that us little peons out here shouldn't be able to do what human nature inclines us to often do - share what we have with others. That's the point I'm trying to make.
And, human nature being what it is, people are always going to want to purchase those hard copies of things they really enjoy, too. Artists make money in so many, many ways that I cannot help but believe this whole, invasive attack on such a simple and otherwise innocent act called sharing is morally wrong and totally illogical.
The more they continue their power grab, the more they push people to do the very thing they don't care for.
No one should care any more about my sharing a digital file than they do if I share a sandwich. Both acts are sharing. Sharing is not criminal. Sharing is not a bad thing.
And regarding that restaurant; gospel truth, my niece told a waitress recently she would share my soda with me, since neither of us wanted much. She was flat out told by the waitress, "NO SHARING IS ALLOWED".
But the restaurant would have been paid for that 1 soda whether her and I shared it or I drank the whole dang thing by myself, as you agreed, so you see, it's happening already. The ramifications of this insanity...
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re: Re: We cant let this happen
Gee. I've been watching protesters in my state trash our beloved capitol IN THE FLESH. They smoked dope, drank and got sick all over it for a month, they had children under the age of 15 involved in all of this - and none of that occurred on the Internet. I could go on and on but the point is, the way you're talking you'd think no crime exists outside the Internet.
I've read and seen copies of the death threats hand delivered to my state Senators (all by dems, I might add just for brevity).
I have watched union thugs bully and riot small businesses on city streets all across my state - none of that involved the internet.
I feel much safer online than I do walking or driving our illegal/gang/union thug-infested streets these days.
I wish we'd put more of this time, money and effort into fighting REAL crime, not little kiddies who make a COPY of a song...just sayin'.
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Myth to Myth
You see, I generally find men are more likely to use logic and reason over emotion and/or hysteria. Women, on the other hand, do the opposite, often responding out of emotion, which is the way darryl sounded in that post - emotional.
It's truly that simple. One post, one observation on that one post. That's all.
And now haven't we gotten off topic quite enough? Quite frankly, the whole thing seems silly.
On the post: Being Concerned With Free Speech Implications Of PROTECT IP Does Not Mean You Think You're Above The Law
Re:
Oh, kind of like last November's elections? ? ?
"Google and the astroturf groups it bankrolls at least have a sense of what can be accomplished without ending up with shit on their faces. "
IDK...lawsuits 'round the World kind of seem like a bit of poo on their "faces" but maybe that's just me. (Source: http://jurist.org/paperchase/2011/05/google-responds-to-paypal-trade-secrets-lawsuit.php)
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hate Speech
It wasn't an "angle" I took, it was a simple observation.
"Or are you projecting your own fear of being different into an insult against darryl's presumed sense of masculinity? "
HUH? *scratches head*
I never heard of "Monkey Island" so you lost me on that one, sorry.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: stupids
"A judge for the US District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia on Thursday struck down a campaign finance law which bans corporations from making contributions to federal candidates, citing the controversial Supreme Court decision in Citizens United..."
http://jurist.org/paperchase/2011/05/federal-judge-strikes-down-ban-on-corporate-donatio ns-to-candidates.php
Sue the judge! Copying! (Good grief.)
Just think about lawsuits and case laws - how they ALWAYS look to previous cases and the subsequent rulings as a basis for court cases.
So by the logic of you "anti copy" people, should this practice be abolished as well? Good luck with that one.
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re:
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Are you crazy???
On the post: Can We Kill Off This Myth That The Internet Is A Wild West That Needs To Be Tamed?
Re: Re: Re: Many to many ??? (what like a world war ?)
You see, they can't understand logic like yours in that by using others experiences and work for examples to learn what works and what doesn't, and/or for inspiration, they are COPYING therefore STEALING. For crying all night, they just cannot be original!!!
Really ticks me off because they're using my tax dollars to pull stunts like this! Of all the unmitigated gall, huh? (Ahem)
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copyright forever
That is physical violence - hardly a comparison.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copyright forever
Look up the word "copy": an imitation, reproduction, or transcript of an original.
It's not criminal, nor is it "illegal" to copy. Well, some WANT it to be but you can put it on paper all you want, you're not going to alter human nature. Can't be done.
If you find an original Picasso and you take that original piece of art work without paying you're stealing. Agree?
But if a student of art practices their skills and paints a pretty good replica of a Picasso painting, how is that "stealing"? Experts know an original and always will.
The copy, on the other hand, will never have any serious value. And the artists knows that. Seems so elementary IMHO...
Curious ... Do you think every Elvis impersonator should be arrested for "copyright infringement" because they copied the likeness of another human being's existence?
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: Are you crazy???
Atheist? Believe we came from monkeys? Okay, then monkeys have one hell of a lawsuit...
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: Re: From the You're-Still-Full-Of-Shit-Department
"at least your racest and elitest and sexist tendencies are being displayed now Mike."
@darryl - that is really close to defamation. Defamation is against the law.
Now, I COULD do what loonies always do; pick on spelling 'cuz you see, it's not "racest" it's "racist", but I guess I won't bother to "go there". Darryl is upset enough ... deep breathes, Darryl...don't want you to have an apoplexy.
On the post: Waiting 100+ Years For Version 2.0
Re: Re: learn history, find out about Bible 'Copyright'
The Bible was meant to be shared - OMG DOES IT ENCOURAGE STEALING? Of course not, because you can never alter who the original creators are, no more than you can alter God Himself whether you believe or don't believe, share the word or don't share the word.
Which I do, by the way, which means I don't believe in stealing but I sure as shootin' believe in sharing.
If I see a hungry homeless man sitting outside a restaurant and I go in, order my meal, set aside half my sandwich in a napkin, eat my fill, go outside and give that other half to the hungry homeless man. Did I just embark upon an act of kindness? Or have I just "stolen" from the restaurant because the homeless man didn't pay for that part of the sandwich? Of course not, I paid for it. I just SHARED it.
Or do you think the homeless man should go in and pay for "his share"? Isn't that a double-do? What if I shared it with 3 homeless people? Should the restaurant then get paid 4 times - for one meal? They didn't need more ingredients, more supplies, more electricity, more chef's etc., to "create" anything new.
Now some of you may think that's a ridiculous analogy but before you go off half cocked, give it some thought because that's the road we're heading on with all this nonsense of "sharing is stealing". Sharing is part and parcel of a good human beings human nature.
And what would a cold hearted, greedy person do? They'd look at the homeless man and think "BUM! Wish those vagrants wouldn't exist!" Or something along those lines...like some of you "haters" here act.
End rant.
Next >>