wow, this logic is in the lines of:
I don't want to be hurt in a car crash so I'll drive an bigass armored car, that will probably hurt others in a crash... but not me!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Even given ALL your claims, Mike, Aaron Swartz let himself in for it.
He's calling him out on his obvious hypocrisy. Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't make you a hypocrite, since you're not doing something you've called someone else out on.
Example:
1. you are dressed at a nudist beach and you're making fun out of someone else who is dressed at that same beach
2. if I point out your hypocrisy my state of clothes is irrelevant to the point I'm making
Yeah and having just 2 political parties helps alleviate that fear. Socialism has to be run by the government - but make your government transparent and less bloated (military budget!!!) and presto - working socialism. You don't believe me? Check Sweden and Denmark.
No, that is not true: The August 7 order was not limited to authors "paid . . . to report or comment" or to "quid pro quo" situations. Rather, the order was designed to bring to light authors whose statements about the issues in the case might have been influenced by the receipt of money from Google or Oracle. For example, Oracle has disclosed that it retained a blogger as a consultant. Even though the payment was for consulting work, the payment might have influenced the blogger’s reports on issues in the civil action.
Judge Alsup added: "Google suggests that it has paid so many commenters that it will be impossible to list them all. Please simply do your best but the impossible is not required. Oracle managed to do it."
So if Masnick is a paid "google apologist" (really, these words have a meaning?) and a anti-IP zealot (hrhr, yeah, like atheist are zealots) - so is EVERYONE from this set of people:
(a) all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees; and
(b) employees/commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.
Ehm, where did Google ever said that Mike is paid by them? Oh, you mean when that funny "name all the blogs that speak favorably of you" thing happened? Big search conspiracy!!!! Argh, those evil smart people, making my internet easier to search. Bastards.
Links or it didn't happen. (being paid by google, that is. And no - adsense does not count)
On the post: Warner Bros. Admits To Issuing Bogus Takedowns; Gloats To Court How There's Nothing Anyone Can Do About That
Re: Re: Re: Warner Bros. actually IS correct here.
On the post: California College Tells Student He Can't Hand Out Copies Of The Constitution On Constitution Day
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: staged
I don't want to be hurt in a car crash so I'll drive an bigass armored car, that will probably hurt others in a crash... but not me!
On the post: Linus Torvalds Admits He Was Approached By US Government To Insert Backdoor Into Linux -- Or Does He?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Don't trust - reverse engineer
On the post: More Details Emerge On Key Legal Fight Over DMCA Abuse
Re: Re: Re: Why am I not surprised?
On the post: CBS Will Sue Aereo In Boston, Preferably In The Alternate Reality Where CBS Is Winning
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Aaron Swartz's Partner Accuses DOJ Of Lying, Seizing Evidence Without A Warrant & Withholding Exculpatory Evidence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Even given ALL your claims, Mike, Aaron Swartz let himself in for it.
Example:
1. you are dressed at a nudist beach and you're making fun out of someone else who is dressed at that same beach
2. if I point out your hypocrisy my state of clothes is irrelevant to the point I'm making
At best it's ironic.
On the post: Aaron Swartz's Partner Accuses DOJ Of Lying, Seizing Evidence Without A Warrant & Withholding Exculpatory Evidence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Aaron Swartz's Partner Accuses DOJ Of Lying, Seizing Evidence Without A Warrant & Withholding Exculpatory Evidence
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Teri Buhl Responds To Our Story; Still Confused About The Internet And The Law
Re: End User Tickets and the real errors
This comic panel springs to mind:
317 clicks has corrected the error.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz's Husband Criticizes Swartz Family For Suggesting Prosecution Of Their Son Contributed To His Suicide
Re:
On the post: Carmen Ortiz's Husband Criticizes Swartz Family For Suggesting Prosecution Of Their Son Contributed To His Suicide
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dolan's tweets
#trollism
On the post: Carmen Ortiz's Husband Criticizes Swartz Family For Suggesting Prosecution Of Their Son Contributed To His Suicide
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dolan's tweets
Manning, obviously.
On the post: 30 Years Of The CD, Of Digital Piracy, And Of Music Industry Cluelessness
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Amanda Palmer Unleashes The Voice Of The People About Health Insurance Via Twitter
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: But Of Course: Ridiculous ACTA Provisions Magically Appear In CETA
Re: Re:
On the post: WIPO Scared Of The Pirate Party; Won't Give It Observer Status Due To Objections Despite Meeting Criteria
Re: Re: Re: Re:
Oh, like the movie industry? Whoops, my bad - they ARE employing around 8 billion people.
On the post: DHS Boss, In Charge Of Cybersecurity, Doesn't Use Email Or Any Online Services
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The August 7 order was not limited to authors "paid . . . to report or comment" or to "quid pro quo" situations. Rather, the order was designed to bring to light authors whose statements about the issues in the case might have been influenced by the receipt of money from Google or Oracle. For example, Oracle has disclosed that it retained a blogger as a consultant. Even though the payment was for consulting work, the payment might have influenced the blogger’s reports on issues in the civil action.
Judge Alsup added: "Google suggests that it has paid so many commenters that it will be impossible to list them all. Please simply do your best but the impossible is not required. Oracle managed to do it."
So if Masnick is a paid "google apologist" (really, these words have a meaning?) and a anti-IP zealot (hrhr, yeah, like atheist are zealots) - so is EVERYONE from this set of people:
(a) all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees; and
(b) employees/commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.
Not a small set. Troll harder.
On the post: DHS Boss, In Charge Of Cybersecurity, Doesn't Use Email Or Any Online Services
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Links or it didn't happen. (being paid by google, that is. And no - adsense does not count)
On the post: DHS Boss, In Charge Of Cybersecurity, Doesn't Use Email Or Any Online Services
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
(see what I did there?)
On the post: DHS Boss, In Charge Of Cybersecurity, Doesn't Use Email Or Any Online Services
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Next >>