"Hey, Out_of_the_blue! In case you're reading this, for this one thing, at least you're not pulling things out of your ass. I apologize, I admit, I got it wrong."
Not to pile on, but it was AJ hiding as an AC that brought Hume up, not OOTB, who I'd imagine has no idea whom Hume is to begin with....
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
Why are you not responding on this point, Blue? I've specifically called out your hypocrisy and your tapdancing attempt to pretend like you didn't ad-hom me specifically. Your refusal to respond, or apologize for your un-instigated attack is quite telling, I'm afraid.
In fact, I think I'll make this comment a First Word, just to make sure you have all the best opportunities to see it....
"In that article where Mike said copyright has both property-like and non-property like aspects, he never once even mentioned the word Hume. So hasn't_got_a_clue is pulling things out of his ass again."
No, actually, Mike has mentioned Hume before (I know exactly what comment AJ is referring to), but at no point did Mike, or anyone else at Techdirt, "insist" that we have to use Hume's definition. In fact, it's been repeated by all of us here at Techdirt that appeals to authority are poor forms of argument. In fact, Mike made that same point in the comment to which AJ is referring to.
This, specifically, is a wonderful example of how AJ takes portions of comments out of context, cherry-picked from long ago to attempt to smear another person because he doesn't have a valid argument or point to make. It'd be disgusting if I thought anyone here was stupid enough to fall for it....
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
"@"Dark Helmet": I didn't address you, why are you responding?"
Dick_Helmet was an obvious reference to me. Why are you pretending otherwise? It was an obvious ad-hom when you constantly decry them. Hypocrisy defined.
"Will you go on record here under penalty of perjury that you never reply to my posts except visibly and under your Dark Helmet account?"
Yes, I absolutely will. On the off chance that you think there was a case when an AC was indeed me, or any other account for that matter, tell me where it was and I'll happily confirm, under penalties of perjury, each specific instance. I do not post here except under my account. End of story, full stop.
Actually, that analogy is silly because the digital content we're talking about costs nothing to marginally produce in terms of copies. At the macro level, the only thing the entertainment industry needs to be concerned about is total dollars spent by people. If a pirate "pirates" $10k worth of digital content and spends $1k on digital content, he's an immensely better customer than the non-pirate who buys $500 worth of content.
Re: Re: @AC: Timmy is mainly complaining that he's affected.
Are you fucking kidding me? SEAL Team 6 got bin Laden, a man with American blood on his hands. I don't give a shit what political path you follow, a man who orchestrates the murder of American civilians is a marked man.
I never thought you'd up your dumbass level of crazy to actually attack the operation that finally got Osama bin Laden, but congratulations, you got there. Go piss on heroes somewhere else, delusional moron...
I mean, I could tell you, but the levels of this conspiracy are so beyond anything you've ever considered before, it would literally 'splode your brain (also balls)....
As someone who has the TD hoodie, I can attest to its awesomeness. It is warm, comfortable, and it's guaranteed to give you a bigger penis, even if you're a woman....
I tried one once, but then we got to the step where they DEMANDED I accept God into my life. Apparently shouting "Go fuck yourself" over and over again, as though on loop, in a 12 step meeting will get you tossed out....just as Jesus intended....
"However, you haven't disposed of the moral argument just because this one fellow is magnaminous. The moral case is forever that Bradner can dispose of his invention any way that HE chooses, but that all others have no inherent right to profit (monetarily) from it."
You're only telling one side of the story and arguably the less important side. If we accept that morality is a social construct (which I do) and is thus to be viewed primarily from the standpoint of greater society (which it should), then the proper frame for the moral argument is what is moral for SOCIETY, not the individual creator. In the case of biomedical patents, there is no moral argument for creation and patent, because this case shows that the moral goal of helping the sick is better obtained through free sharing and without the patent. I'd argue you're mis-framing the moral argument entirely.
"As to more efficient: remains to be seen. I can imagine circumstances in which the profit motive gets this developed more quickly..."
That's only the case if you believe creation won't happen without the patent. While this is but one example, it is a testament to it's possible falsity.
"[Let's take as premise that orthographic spelling is honorable and promotes civilization. Yet you use these characters: "distruction". -- Were you going for "destruction" or "distraction"? Cause either might work. Or just going for logoplex?]"
While your premise that spelling has anything to do with reality, you're absolutely correct that I misspelled "destruction", so thanks for pointing it out. I'll edit to correct that momentarily.
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not to pile on, but it was AJ hiding as an AC that brought Hume up, not OOTB, who I'd imagine has no idea whom Hume is to begin with....
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
In fact, I think I'll make this comment a First Word, just to make sure you have all the best opportunities to see it....
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, actually, Mike has mentioned Hume before (I know exactly what comment AJ is referring to), but at no point did Mike, or anyone else at Techdirt, "insist" that we have to use Hume's definition. In fact, it's been repeated by all of us here at Techdirt that appeals to authority are poor forms of argument. In fact, Mike made that same point in the comment to which AJ is referring to.
This, specifically, is a wonderful example of how AJ takes portions of comments out of context, cherry-picked from long ago to attempt to smear another person because he doesn't have a valid argument or point to make. It'd be disgusting if I thought anyone here was stupid enough to fall for it....
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
And where exactly did he insist this? If he didn't, your entire rant is baseless. If he did, I'd fucking love to see it....
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
Dick_Helmet was an obvious reference to me. Why are you pretending otherwise? It was an obvious ad-hom when you constantly decry them. Hypocrisy defined.
"Will you go on record here under penalty of perjury that you never reply to my posts except visibly and under your Dark Helmet account?"
Yes, I absolutely will. On the off chance that you think there was a case when an AC was indeed me, or any other account for that matter, tell me where it was and I'll happily confirm, under penalties of perjury, each specific instance. I do not post here except under my account. End of story, full stop.
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: "who the fuck are you that he should take time out of his busy schedule to just drop everything to answer your question."
On the post: Members Of The Republican Study Committee Do Twitter Q&A, Ignore Every Single Question About Fixing Copyright
Re: Re:
On the post: It's Important To Learn From Business Model Failures As Well
Re: Failures = dog bites man story, Mike.
Good times....
On the post: Dear RIAA: Pirates Buy More. Full Stop. Deal With It.
Re:
C'mon, this stuff isn't hard....
On the post: TSA/Airport Security: Killing Us On Christmas
Re: Re: @AC: Timmy is mainly complaining that he's affected.
I never thought you'd up your dumbass level of crazy to actually attack the operation that finally got Osama bin Laden, but congratulations, you got there. Go piss on heroes somewhere else, delusional moron...
On the post: Holiday Deals In The Techdirt Insider Shop
Re:
On the post: Holiday Deals In The Techdirt Insider Shop
Re: Re: Testimonial
On the post: Holiday Deals In The Techdirt Insider Shop
Testimonial
On the post: App Developer Hijacks Customer Twitter Accounts In An Attempt To Shame Pirates
Re: Re:
I tried one once, but then we got to the step where they DEMANDED I accept God into my life. Apparently shouting "Go fuck yourself" over and over again, as though on loop, in a 12 step meeting will get you tossed out....just as Jesus intended....
On the post: Doug Stanhope: Piracy Is A Problem Only If You Think Of It As A Problem
Re: Okay, now what about $100M movies?
On the post: Doug Stanhope: Piracy Is A Problem Only If You Think Of It As A Problem
Re:
On the post: Harvard Research Scientist: Sharing Discoveries More Efficient, More Honorable Than Patenting Them
Re: Re: Re: Laws are for the dishonorable.
On the post: Harvard Research Scientist: Sharing Discoveries More Efficient, More Honorable Than Patenting Them
Re: Laws are for the dishonorable.
You're only telling one side of the story and arguably the less important side. If we accept that morality is a social construct (which I do) and is thus to be viewed primarily from the standpoint of greater society (which it should), then the proper frame for the moral argument is what is moral for SOCIETY, not the individual creator. In the case of biomedical patents, there is no moral argument for creation and patent, because this case shows that the moral goal of helping the sick is better obtained through free sharing and without the patent. I'd argue you're mis-framing the moral argument entirely.
"As to more efficient: remains to be seen. I can imagine circumstances in which the profit motive gets this developed more quickly..."
That's only the case if you believe creation won't happen without the patent. While this is but one example, it is a testament to it's possible falsity.
"[Let's take as premise that orthographic spelling is honorable and promotes civilization. Yet you use these characters: "distruction". -- Were you going for "destruction" or "distraction"? Cause either might work. Or just going for logoplex?]"
While your premise that spelling has anything to do with reality, you're absolutely correct that I misspelled "destruction", so thanks for pointing it out. I'll edit to correct that momentarily.
Next >>