Sure there is: Present an argument that explains why EARN IT is a good bill without resorting to bullshit arguments and lame rhetorical gimmicks.
Your inability to debate anything with any actual motherfucking sincerity—everything is a joke to you, every word someone writes an opportunity for you to mock and belittle them for giving a shit—is your problem, not mine. Stop being a smarmy little shithead and give me an argument with some fucking shark-level teeth or fuck all the way off, Hamilton.
If I can present a single good argument for the bill itself, would you then reconsider your position?
You have little hope of doing what the Congressfolk couldn’t. But if you really believe you can put forth an argument based on logic from this reality instead of your own, Hamilton, at least try to do it without using your pathetic rhetorical gimmick.
What is it that the article is trying to say, in simple terms?
Congressfolk have threatened to ban, or at least weaken, end-to-end encryption. They say they want to do this for the sake of fighting the scourge of CSAM. But the Congressfolk appear to misunderstand encryption technology and misrepresent their own arguments and motivations. As a result, their arguments for the passage of EARN IT are about as flimsy as a wet tissue.
Intelligence isn’t a living thing either, but you’re doing a wonderful job of threatening to degrade everyone else’s intelligence with each of your posts.
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your claim is objectively true? Remember to cite credible sources of information instead of Project Veritas and their right-wing media brethren.
considering Project Veritas' main method of operating is trying to obtain private documents, or record secret conversations, it is bizarre beyond belief that Project Veritas is literally claiming that private material has some sort of 1st Amendment protection
They believe in the conservative idea of “free speech”, which is “free speech for me but not for thee”. They’re not capable of shame or guilt or remorse; pointing out their hypocrisy will only embolden them.
They are sociopaths, and they don’t care who they hurt in their quest for fame and glory (and the shitloads of money to be made by grifting gullible right-wingers).
The Declaration of Independence was merely that: a declaration of independence from the American colonies. It isn’t a document establishing any kind of legal power and it carries no legal force anywhere—including the United Kingdom.
I hate to use this word but in this context it's necessary
No. No, it was not. You easily could’ve gotten your point across without using that word. And before you say anything in response: I’ve used that word here before in talking about offensive speech, consequences, and learning from said consequences—and doing so remains a huge regret of mine.
You don’t need to use the word. At all. And if you feel that you absolutely, positively, unquestionably must use that word, either say “N-word” (everyone knows what that means) or censor it somehow.
Did Vinson threaten Antoniello with violence from either Vinson or a third party? Did Vinson suggest someone should commit a criminal act against Antoniello? If the answer to both questions is “no”, you may want to reconsider your argument.
Saying (or implying) other people should leave bad reviews of a business/product you had a bad experience with is legal speech. Review bombing may be unethical, but it sure as shit isn’t illegal, and neither is a coordinated review bomb. It might feel like harassment to the person on the receiving end of that bomb, sure. But unless actual unlawful acts are being committed by these review bombers, nobody has broken a law worth a good god’s damn. People are legally allowed to have and express their opinions. This isn’t a hard argument to figure out; even the cops/DA didn’t want to enforce the shitty law mentioned in the article when faced with even slight pushback.
You’re standing on a shaky hill of an argument here, dude. You might want to ask yourself whether you’re willing to die on it.
the mass shootings? Is that, like, part of the floor show during Rocky Horror showings or something?
They don’t happen often, even here in the United States, but they happen often enough—and are often deadly enough—that one might rethink the entire notion of going to a crowded movie theater.
[Netflix has] never once created a movie franchise that could do anything at the box office except the bare minimum to qualify for Oscars.
Has Netflix even been trying to do that? Because last time I checked, Netflix wasn’t trying to push its wholly original movies into wide theatrical releases for the purpose of making shitloads of money. Hell, its most successful franchises are already serials (e.g., Stranger Things).
The theatrical window is outdated consumer-unfriendly bullshit. People shouldn’t have to wait six fucking months before a movie that played in theaters shows up on a streaming service. They shouldn’t even have to wait three months for it to drop on home video. The studios have the power to put their movie out on every possible format on the same day; the fact that several movies did day-and-date theatrical and streaming/VOD releases during the pandemic is proof enough of that.
Other than the boogeyman of piracy (which anyone with any goddamn sense will tell you is bullshit), I can think of no decent reason to avoid day-and-date theatrical and streaming releases for a film like the one for The Matrix Resurrections. No one has yet offered one that can’t be dismissed as more “fuck the consumer” bullshit. Now guess how your “nobody will be able to make a theatrical franchise any more” reasoning fared!
I should note here that both Microsoft and Sony each own a game franchise that either has shown up or will be showing up on the Switch: Minecraft for Microsoft and MLB: The Show for Sony. (And Minecraft has cross-platform play, to boot.) Nintendo doesn’t need to buy out parts of the gaming industry for itself; on a long enough timeline, the industry will instead voluntarily work with Nintendo.
the sound library exists solely to have justification for the takedown of GilvaSunner in the court of public opinion
If GilvaSunner had only posted the music in the specific sound library that Nintendo released, that justification might hold up better. But he didn’t. So it doesn’t.
The amount of profit depends on how much money the department receives from the city/the state/the federal government. If public funds already cover the costs of running the department, the fines would represent pure profit.
On the post: Minneapolis Police Officers Demanded No-Knock Warrant, Killed Innocent Gunowner Nine Seconds After Entering Residence
An acceptable amount, it would seem.
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
Sure there is: Present an argument that explains why EARN IT is a good bill without resorting to bullshit arguments and lame rhetorical gimmicks.
Your inability to debate anything with any actual motherfucking sincerity—everything is a joke to you, every word someone writes an opportunity for you to mock and belittle them for giving a shit—is your problem, not mine. Stop being a smarmy little shithead and give me an argument with some fucking shark-level teeth or fuck all the way off, Hamilton.
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
Do you practice being this smarmy and disingenuous, or does it come as naturally to you as it does to the average conservative lawmaker?
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
You have little hope of doing what the Congressfolk couldn’t. But if you really believe you can put forth an argument based on logic from this reality instead of your own, Hamilton, at least try to do it without using your pathetic rhetorical gimmick.
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
Congressfolk have threatened to ban, or at least weaken, end-to-end encryption. They say they want to do this for the sake of fighting the scourge of CSAM. But the Congressfolk appear to misunderstand encryption technology and misrepresent their own arguments and motivations. As a result, their arguments for the passage of EARN IT are about as flimsy as a wet tissue.
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
Intelligence isn’t a living thing either, but you’re doing a wonderful job of threatening to degrade everyone else’s intelligence with each of your posts.
On the post: The Top Ten Mistakes Senators Made During Today's EARN IT Markup
Sir, this is a Denny’s.
On the post: Court (For Now) Says NY Times Can Publish Project Veritas Documents
Can you prove beyond a reasonable doubt that your claim is objectively true? Remember to cite credible sources of information instead of Project Veritas and their right-wing media brethren.
On the post: Court (For Now) Says NY Times Can Publish Project Veritas Documents
They believe in the conservative idea of “free speech”, which is “free speech for me but not for thee”. They’re not capable of shame or guilt or remorse; pointing out their hypocrisy will only embolden them.
They are sociopaths, and they don’t care who they hurt in their quest for fame and glory (and the shitloads of money to be made by grifting gullible right-wingers).
On the post: Terrible Vermont Harassment Law Being Challenged After Cops Use It To Punish A Black Lives Matter Supporter Over Her Facebook Posts
The Declaration of Independence was merely that: a declaration of independence from the American colonies. It isn’t a document establishing any kind of legal power and it carries no legal force anywhere—including the United Kingdom.
On the post: First Circuit Tears Into Boston PD's Bullshit Gang Database While Overturning A Deportation Decision
No. No, it was not. You easily could’ve gotten your point across without using that word. And before you say anything in response: I’ve used that word here before in talking about offensive speech, consequences, and learning from said consequences—and doing so remains a huge regret of mine.
You don’t need to use the word. At all. And if you feel that you absolutely, positively, unquestionably must use that word, either say “N-word” (everyone knows what that means) or censor it somehow.
On the post: Terrible Vermont Harassment Law Being Challenged After Cops Use It To Punish A Black Lives Matter Supporter Over Her Facebook Posts
Did Vinson threaten Antoniello with violence from either Vinson or a third party? Did Vinson suggest someone should commit a criminal act against Antoniello? If the answer to both questions is “no”, you may want to reconsider your argument.
Saying (or implying) other people should leave bad reviews of a business/product you had a bad experience with is legal speech. Review bombing may be unethical, but it sure as shit isn’t illegal, and neither is a coordinated review bomb. It might feel like harassment to the person on the receiving end of that bomb, sure. But unless actual unlawful acts are being committed by these review bombers, nobody has broken a law worth a good god’s damn. People are legally allowed to have and express their opinions. This isn’t a hard argument to figure out; even the cops/DA didn’t want to enforce the shitty law mentioned in the article when faced with even slight pushback.
You’re standing on a shaky hill of an argument here, dude. You might want to ask yourself whether you’re willing to die on it.
On the post: Terrible Vermont Harassment Law Being Challenged After Cops Use It To Punish A Black Lives Matter Supporter Over Her Facebook Posts
Hey! Despite some of my more long-winded and profane comments here, I’m a generally mellow guy.
…oh wait, you said “stoned”
On the post: WarnerMedia Sued For Giving People Want They Wanted (The Matrix, Streaming) During An Historic Health Crisis
They don’t happen often, even here in the United States, but they happen often enough—and are often deadly enough—that one might rethink the entire notion of going to a crowded movie theater.
On the post: WarnerMedia Sued For Giving People Want They Wanted (The Matrix, Streaming) During An Historic Health Crisis
Has Netflix even been trying to do that? Because last time I checked, Netflix wasn’t trying to push its wholly original movies into wide theatrical releases for the purpose of making shitloads of money. Hell, its most successful franchises are already serials (e.g., Stranger Things).
The theatrical window is outdated consumer-unfriendly bullshit. People shouldn’t have to wait six fucking months before a movie that played in theaters shows up on a streaming service. They shouldn’t even have to wait three months for it to drop on home video. The studios have the power to put their movie out on every possible format on the same day; the fact that several movies did day-and-date theatrical and streaming/VOD releases during the pandemic is proof enough of that.
Other than the boogeyman of piracy (which anyone with any goddamn sense will tell you is bullshit), I can think of no decent reason to avoid day-and-date theatrical and streaming releases for a film like the one for The Matrix Resurrections. No one has yet offered one that can’t be dismissed as more “fuck the consumer” bullshit. Now guess how your “nobody will be able to make a theatrical franchise any more” reasoning fared!
On the post: Hypocrisy Rules As Companies Try To Smear New FTC Nomination Alvaro Bedoya
Go to bed, Donald.
On the post: Consolidation Strategies Emerge For The Big 3 In Gaming: Nintendo Looks Like It Doesn't Want To Play
I should note here that both Microsoft and Sony each own a game franchise that either has shown up or will be showing up on the Switch: Minecraft for Microsoft and MLB: The Show for Sony. (And Minecraft has cross-platform play, to boot.) Nintendo doesn’t need to buy out parts of the gaming industry for itself; on a long enough timeline, the industry will instead voluntarily work with Nintendo.
On the post: GilvaSunner YouTube Channel Shuts Down Due To Copyright Strikes From Nintendo; Pokemon Releases Music
If GilvaSunner had only posted the music in the specific sound library that Nintendo released, that justification might hold up better. But he didn’t. So it doesn’t.
On the post: GilvaSunner YouTube Channel Shuts Down Due To Copyright Strikes From Nintendo; Pokemon Releases Music
🚨 UPDATE 🚨
YouTube has confirmed the veracity of the takedown claims.
On the post: Small Alabama Town's Overzealous Traffic Cops Also Monitored Internet Traffic To Threaten Critics Of The Corrupt PD
The amount of profit depends on how much money the department receives from the city/the state/the federal government. If public funds already cover the costs of running the department, the fines would represent pure profit.
Next >>