But in philosophy, is the definition/concept explored in relation to religion? It's one of those things that we can't really fathom the non-existence of simply because we are truly incapable of conceiving of it without the context of having it.
Human nature is not good or evil in and of itself. We can only make judgement's based upon our current conception of morality.
No, we aren't saying that no pedophiles would exist, only that it wouldn't be considered evil without something to compare it to. In a world where people ate babies, I'm sure a pedophile would be considered a step up. Don't try and polarize the argument with the children - you don't accept it when that is used to validate SOPA, so why should it be acceptable for this discussion?
I always remind myself that not too long ago it was wrong to let women and black people vote, and that was perfectly moral at the time. Even people viewed widely as 'good' felt that way.
I trust you understand that this isn't to fly in the face of any morality of today, but to make us actually consider why we find something evil or good - not just because someone says so.
Did the site direct him to the ToS upon initial viewing? This is as bad as those 'if you open this you agree to the ToS contained within (that we all know you haven't read, because you don't have x-ray vision! bwahahah)' products.
While the comment may be flippant, I think it could be well argued that without religion pointing out what is considered 'good' there could be no 'evil.'
I don't even think it would be so bad, but you can't just order HBO - you have to order 3 other packages before you have the privilege of ordering HBO...
I disagree about the air-tight, bullet-proof evidence. If that is what it took to find someone guilty of offence, we would be ill-served. There is something called weight-of-evidence, which while not a smoking gun, does add up to proof beyond a reasonable doubt.
Other AC - I often get some follow-up information to my questions - it may not happen right away but someone usually takes pity on my ignorance. It's one of the things I like about this site. I don't agree with everything, but I feel more informed about my views after. Dissenting views are incredibly important to me.
Man, I hate to do this, but yeah, it is ok to accuse someone. While his initial comments seemed off the cuff, his further comments add more perspective to it.
While I will certainly not claim to be an expert on this, from what I see going back and forth, if there is no direct consequence to the accusation, it seems like a bit of ass-like system, but it could be worse.
You can sue anyone for anything, and you can accuse anyone of anything. There should be some repercussions to false accusations though. If financial burden is placed on someone through frivolous accusations they should have recourse for remediation.
I seem to recall reading earlier that this HADOPI thing (yeah, I'm calling it a thing because I don't really understand it well) had people getting their internet access shut off without the investigation. From what I am reading now that does not seem like the case.
I would love someone to explain it a little more to me (small words, pictures appreciated).
I don't think the point of the article was to justify piracy as a new means of distribution (although that argument has been made...) but to show that what someone today thinks is a grand idea to preserve their income can actually hurt the entity they are supposed to be working for in the long run.
The point that I have taken away from all of these piracy arguments is that it isn't black and white like the Jolly Roger.
I think part of the difficulty comes from the inability to actually make those back-ups because the DRM or rights assigned don't legally permit it.
I also do not think it is moronic to put a sheen of virtue - people do it all the time in other areas when they feel a law should be changed (such as the one preventing women and non-whites from voting). Through explaining the virtue that some might not see, you hope to convert them to your way of thinking - which is not immoral or moronic.
I'm willing to bet there is a clause in there somewhere about anything you do it work is not considered private and if you expect that you must level the premises... 198...what year was it again?
It is just sad that there is even the need for whistleblowers. What ever happened to just trying to do the right thing? You can get paid for doing good things as well as bad things - but so many people prefer to do the wrong things.
Embracing piracy is not the same thing as not enforcing your IP. They are required to enforce it (or at least attempt to) lest they be deemed to have abandoned it.
Did they follow up or did you take the jewelry down and they left it at that?
The labels won't listen because they recognize if they go down this road they are doomed. That is because there is a distinct difference between what Rovio does and what they do.
Rovio created the game. They are more than just the gatekeepers. The people most upset about piracy in Rovio's case are probably the folks at Apple.
Likewise, if the labels actually created to content, they likely wouldn't be as upset about piracy. They are just the channel, not the content.
I read an article in the Globe & Mail (national newspaper in Canada) in regards to a similar issue. There was a Canadian businessman who bought a mill in the US and was trying to keep it open. Customs denied him entry because they argued the work could be done in the US... well, it could have, if anyone in the US had wanted those people to keep their jobs...
There really should be a minimum standard of education and experience to work in customs.
That said, I haven't had any difficulties with the individuals I have dealt with when I have to travel for work so I can only assume there is more to the story in every case.
On the post: Twitter Sued For Defamation By Someone Who Thinks It's Responsible For 'Publishing' Tweets
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Idiots
Human nature is not good or evil in and of itself. We can only make judgement's based upon our current conception of morality.
No, we aren't saying that no pedophiles would exist, only that it wouldn't be considered evil without something to compare it to. In a world where people ate babies, I'm sure a pedophile would be considered a step up. Don't try and polarize the argument with the children - you don't accept it when that is used to validate SOPA, so why should it be acceptable for this discussion?
I always remind myself that not too long ago it was wrong to let women and black people vote, and that was perfectly moral at the time. Even people viewed widely as 'good' felt that way.
I trust you understand that this isn't to fly in the face of any morality of today, but to make us actually consider why we find something evil or good - not just because someone says so.
On the post: Twitter Sued For Defamation By Someone Who Thinks It's Responsible For 'Publishing' Tweets
Re: Did I miss something?
On the post: Twitter Sued For Defamation By Someone Who Thinks It's Responsible For 'Publishing' Tweets
Re: Re: Re: Idiots
On the post: How To Turn A Legitimate Buyer Into A Pirate In Five Easy Steps
Re: Re: I was doing this 4 hours ago
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re:
One thing is for certain - that officer who was heading up the investigation and then went to WB should be investigated. It's deplorable conduct.
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re:
On the post: The Pirate Bay's Peter Sunde Questions Why We Let Dying Industries Dictate Terms Of Democracy
Re:
On the post: Hadopi Sends Info On Those Accused (Not Convicted) Of Repeat Infringement On To Prosecutors
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Other AC - I often get some follow-up information to my questions - it may not happen right away but someone usually takes pity on my ignorance. It's one of the things I like about this site. I don't agree with everything, but I feel more informed about my views after. Dissenting views are incredibly important to me.
On the post: Hadopi Sends Info On Those Accused (Not Convicted) Of Repeat Infringement On To Prosecutors
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
While I will certainly not claim to be an expert on this, from what I see going back and forth, if there is no direct consequence to the accusation, it seems like a bit of ass-like system, but it could be worse.
You can sue anyone for anything, and you can accuse anyone of anything. There should be some repercussions to false accusations though. If financial burden is placed on someone through frivolous accusations they should have recourse for remediation.
I seem to recall reading earlier that this HADOPI thing (yeah, I'm calling it a thing because I don't really understand it well) had people getting their internet access shut off without the investigation. From what I am reading now that does not seem like the case.
I would love someone to explain it a little more to me (small words, pictures appreciated).
On the post: Protecting The Artists? Disney's Marvel Uses Copyright To Crush Already Broke Ghost Rider Creator
Re:
Of course, someone will play lawyer and say something stupid like "but if he signed over the rights that means he didn't create it."
On the post: How Does The Penalty For 'Content Theft' Match Up With Similar 'Crimes'?
Re: Re:
On the post: Park Ranger Tases Guy Walking Dogs Without A Leash
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I for one welcome our machine overlords...
On the post: Beach Boys Lyricist Goes After Artist Who Dared To Paint Works Inspired By Beach Boy Songs
Re: Re:
On the post: Why Piracy Is Indispensable For The Survival Of Our Culture
Re: Re: Re: Re: Example:
The point that I have taken away from all of these piracy arguments is that it isn't black and white like the Jolly Roger.
On the post: Why Piracy Is Indispensable For The Survival Of Our Culture
Re:
I also do not think it is moronic to put a sheen of virtue - people do it all the time in other areas when they feel a law should be changed (such as the one preventing women and non-whites from voting). Through explaining the virtue that some might not see, you hope to convert them to your way of thinking - which is not immoral or moronic.
On the post: Whistle-blowing Scientists (Trying To Prevent Dangerous Products From Reaching The Market) Sue FDA For Snooping On Their Personal Email Accounts
Re: Re:
On the post: Whistle-blowing Scientists (Trying To Prevent Dangerous Products From Reaching The Market) Sue FDA For Snooping On Their Personal Email Accounts
On the post: Angry Birds CEO Explains How The Company Embraces Piracy
Re:
Did they follow up or did you take the jewelry down and they left it at that?
On the post: Angry Birds CEO Explains How The Company Embraces Piracy
Re:
Rovio created the game. They are more than just the gatekeepers. The people most upset about piracy in Rovio's case are probably the folks at Apple.
Likewise, if the labels actually created to content, they likely wouldn't be as upset about piracy. They are just the channel, not the content.
On the post: Homeland Security Denies Entrance To UK Tourist Because Of Twitter Joke
Re: Re: Re: Re:
There really should be a minimum standard of education and experience to work in customs.
That said, I haven't had any difficulties with the individuals I have dealt with when I have to travel for work so I can only assume there is more to the story in every case.
Next >>