"I wish they would do that with speeding laws, and with credit card laws too."
Way to miss the point, again. The point isn't that we should change the law because people are breaking it, the point is that people are breaking it because it is bad law. If speeding laws are being broken because of their impracticality then yes, they probably should be changed.
"Perhaps maybe by allowing freedom to use other people's copyrighted works without permission we would get a flood of great, wonderful, incredibly artful... more of the same?"
Great, so you admit that you're against that sort of thing. If only we had a name so that fact could haunt you. Culture is built on "more of the same", even the culture that doesn't attract lawsuits.
"I like the idea of that route being blocked so people actually have to move forward, instead of just repeating the past."
Yes, because it's the people doing YouTube mashups who are stuck in the past.
I'm disappointed that Xtranormal don't seem to have the option to do it automatically. On the grand scale of technology involved, automated subtitles seems kind of simple.
"Methodology is meaningless. It's like trying to measure the quality of food by measuring the size of people's waistlines. It is a non-matching concept."
Perhaps you'd care to explain to the other anon why you think their statements about the quality of music are bunk too. For consistency's sake.
"the idea that music has gotten better since Napster is laughable"
I ask again, who is suggesting that it has? The article doesn't seem to and neither do the people on this thread. In fact, the article explicitly states that the study concludes music has not gotten better since Napster. You seem to be clinging to a straw man.
"everyone actually in music talks about that fact all the time."
Everyone? So, anyone who doesn't constantly state that music hasn't gotten better since Napster isn't "actually in music"?
"There have been fewer classic albums released in the past ten years than in the any other decade in the entire history of the rock/pop era."
How did you come to that conclusion? Did 'everyone' in music tell you so? Perhaps an explanation of what classic means to you would help us understand.
'the argument was, "It's for official use only, therefore it must be sealed away as though Classified - for the public's benefit, of course!"'
I'm not familiar with the grounds for sealing documents but unless only classified documents can be sealed then it seems conceivable that they wanted them sealed for being sensitive.
I would wholeheartedly agree with you if it weren't for the fact that the case is over whether the documents are classified or not. If the NSA are admitting that the documents are unclassified then that would seem to sink their case. The language is plausible, the context isn't so much.
"My ability to play music is far better than your ability to play noise."
It reminds me of every time a Lady Gaga story comes up someone has to comment on how she has no talent and I have to point out that them not liking her work and her not having talent are two completely different issues.
"Simply put, if you have a consistent name to refer to, I can separate your assertions from the masses of faceless trolls that frequent this site. I can also more effectively debate your points because I know better what your position is. Without an attributable avatar to refer to, you can't except anything but prejudgement from registered users about your motives and agenda."
If they get it this time then I'm going to congratulate you for catering to their attention span. And try it myself sometime.
"If you don't like something, post a response. Don't flag it so more people read it."
I can certainly see the logic there. I think perhaps a sort of downmod button would be at least as effective and less intrusive, where posts can be marked as trollish or some such rather than insightful or funny. Or an option to not hide reported posts (if there isn't one already somewhere).
"Well, being objectionable isn't the only reason things get censored is it?"
Not entirely, no. For example, you could censor something because you feared it might cause distress, but the distinction between objectionable and sensitive is a fine line. The key thing is that you're making a judgement about whether something is appropriate. A voluntary ratings system is probably the least forceful example of censorship, where content gets graded for suitability but people are free to ignore it.
"Or what if you named your topic objectionable content?"
"You mean like when you move something to the off topic section?"
It depends why you moved it there. If you moved it because it was off topic then that is categorisation. If you moved it because it was objectionable then that would be censorship. I apologise if I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to suggest that choosing is the only defining element of the word, just the origin.
On the post: Nick Dynice's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re:
Way to miss the point, again. The point isn't that we should change the law because people are breaking it, the point is that people are breaking it because it is bad law. If speeding laws are being broken because of their impracticality then yes, they probably should be changed.
"Perhaps maybe by allowing freedom to use other people's copyrighted works without permission we would get a flood of great, wonderful, incredibly artful... more of the same?"
Great, so you admit that you're against that sort of thing. If only we had a name so that fact could haunt you. Culture is built on "more of the same", even the culture that doesn't attract lawsuits.
"I like the idea of that route being blocked so people actually have to move forward, instead of just repeating the past."
Yes, because it's the people doing YouTube mashups who are stuck in the past.
On the post: Study Shows That Piracy Has Not Resulted In A Decrease Of Quality New Music
Re: Re: Re:
If you'd read as far as second page then you would have seen the question: "Is the subjective valuation of downloaded albums high or low?"
On the post: Nick Dynice's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
A bit ironic
On the post: But... But... Piracy...
Re: Subtitles, please?
I'm disappointed that Xtranormal don't seem to have the option to do it automatically. On the grand scale of technology involved, automated subtitles seems kind of simple.
On the post: Study Shows That Piracy Has Not Resulted In A Decrease Of Quality New Music
Re: Re:
If it's a made up study then that's still more than you've offered to support your position about the quality of music.
On the post: Study Shows That Piracy Has Not Resulted In A Decrease Of Quality New Music
Re: Re: Re:
Perhaps you'd care to explain to the other anon why you think their statements about the quality of music are bunk too. For consistency's sake.
On the post: Study Shows That Piracy Has Not Resulted In A Decrease Of Quality New Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: bleh
I ask again, who is suggesting that it has? The article doesn't seem to and neither do the people on this thread. In fact, the article explicitly states that the study concludes music has not gotten better since Napster. You seem to be clinging to a straw man.
"everyone actually in music talks about that fact all the time."
Everyone? So, anyone who doesn't constantly state that music hasn't gotten better since Napster isn't "actually in music"?
"There have been fewer classic albums released in the past ten years than in the any other decade in the entire history of the rock/pop era."
How did you come to that conclusion? Did 'everyone' in music tell you so? Perhaps an explanation of what classic means to you would help us understand.
On the post: Court Seals Unclassified Document In Whistleblower Case... After Gov't Falsely Says It's Classified
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're right. I guess I do wholeheartedly agree then.
On the post: Court Seals Unclassified Document In Whistleblower Case... After Gov't Falsely Says It's Classified
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The point is that they could have been arguing based on that, but just worded it badly.
On the post: Study Shows That Piracy Has Not Resulted In A Decrease Of Quality New Music
Re: bleh
The article doesn't suggest that you should. Funny that you complain about Techdirt's bias.
"I was much happier with the quality when major labels were in full force. Not that I'm a fan of major labels."
Why aren't you a fan of them? You apparently dislike everything else.
"rather than having labels weed out the crap for you and present the cream of the crop."
What do you consider the cream of the crop? If finding music you like is the issue here then I'd be glad to help.
On the post: Court Seals Unclassified Document In Whistleblower Case... After Gov't Falsely Says It's Classified
Re: Re:
If only I could see your comment history to better judge whether you're empathic or not. Judging someone while posting anon rather lacks weight.
On the post: Court Seals Unclassified Document In Whistleblower Case... After Gov't Falsely Says It's Classified
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I'm not familiar with the grounds for sealing documents but unless only classified documents can be sealed then it seems conceivable that they wanted them sealed for being sensitive.
On the post: Court Seals Unclassified Document In Whistleblower Case... After Gov't Falsely Says It's Classified
Re: Re: Re:
I would wholeheartedly agree with you if it weren't for the fact that the case is over whether the documents are classified or not. If the NSA are admitting that the documents are unclassified then that would seem to sink their case. The language is plausible, the context isn't so much.
On the post: Geohot Goes On Vacation; Sony Accuses Him Of Fleeing Legal Action
Re:
Saying that the controllers were removed from the drives isn't nasty, it's just plain false.
On the post: Geohot Goes On Vacation; Sony Accuses Him Of Fleeing Legal Action
Re:
Or he has drives with separate controller cards.
On the post: If This Is 'Piracy' Then I Support Piracy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It reminds me of every time a Lady Gaga story comes up someone has to comment on how she has no talent and I have to point out that them not liking her work and her not having talent are two completely different issues.
On the post: If This Is 'Piracy' Then I Support Piracy
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If they get it this time then I'm going to congratulate you for catering to their attention span. And try it myself sometime.
On the post: Judge Says Mass Suing People For Infringement Is Perfectly Fine And Even 'Benefits' Defendants
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I can certainly see the logic there. I think perhaps a sort of downmod button would be at least as effective and less intrusive, where posts can be marked as trollish or some such rather than insightful or funny. Or an option to not hide reported posts (if there isn't one already somewhere).
On the post: Judge Says Mass Suing People For Infringement Is Perfectly Fine And Even 'Benefits' Defendants
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Not entirely, no. For example, you could censor something because you feared it might cause distress, but the distinction between objectionable and sensitive is a fine line. The key thing is that you're making a judgement about whether something is appropriate. A voluntary ratings system is probably the least forceful example of censorship, where content gets graded for suitability but people are free to ignore it.
"Or what if you named your topic objectionable content?"
Heh.
On the post: Judge Says Mass Suing People For Infringement Is Perfectly Fine And Even 'Benefits' Defendants
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It depends why you moved it there. If you moved it because it was off topic then that is categorisation. If you moved it because it was objectionable then that would be censorship. I apologise if I wasn't clear, I didn't mean to suggest that choosing is the only defining element of the word, just the origin.
Next >>