'The problem with the very verbose step through presented in the comment is that it hinges entirely on the following assertion to come to it's eventual conclusion.
"You can't own an Idea"'
Odd that the commenter I think you're referring to said pretty much the opposite: "You own that thought". Your whole comment seems to be arguing against things no one appears to have said.
'The problem with the very verbose step through presented in the comment is that it hinges entirely on the following assertion to come to it's eventual conclusion.
"You can't own an Idea"'
Odd that the commenter I think you're referring to said pretty much the opposite: "You own that thought". Your whole comment seems to be arguing against things no one appears to have said.
"Ooooh, I might have to pull out some poetry for this...."
I had wanted to do my favourites post as a poem but lacked the time. I liked your last one, more would be good. I should start writing again then it may not take me so long to do one off the cuff.
"How can religion have us believe that we're all robots?"
It can't. Evidence: me.
"A robot does what it is programmed to do? We do what we want. We can choose what to do. "
The sort of robot I was referring to is the sort defined in Issac Asimov's books. Fully self aware artificial life forms with certain rules at the core of their programming. AI that is able to choose, to want, but designed to adhere to certain principles.
"You could not define us by our own current definition of robot and no religious book defines us as such."
Well, I wasn't suggesting that we're literally robots.
"We already do, convicts have less rights, mental people have less rights and a lot of minorities in the world have less rights.
why do you assume otherwise."
Mental people? What's that, like imaginary friends or some such?
Anyway, my point was that 'reasonable discussion' is a pretty arbitrary bar for deciding who gets rights. Mentally handicapped people, for example, do get rights whether they are capable of discussing them or not.
"I tell you this, I would give a dog civil liberties before I give them to my android phone. They both would still have to ask me for it first."
If you believe that we were given rights by God, then how do you feel able to decide animals are more worthy than AI? Is that distinction made somewhere in the bible?
"You contradict yourself. Either we have human rights because we were not created by something else, or we are robots created by a higher being."
But when God does it, it's special. When men do it, they're playing at God. Basically, religion would have us believe that we're robots with something akin to Asimov's law coded in our souls.
"The day I can sit down with an artificial being and have a reasonable discussion about why it should be grated rights is the day I will be willing to grant them."
Does that mean we can take the rights from humans with whom you can't have that discussion?
Re: Re: Re: Re: It all depends what level of proof that you want
"All of the USENET sites sell access and they usually charge more money than the NY Times wants to charge for their site."
USENET gives access to more than the content of one newspaper. It seems telling that you choose to compare NYT to USENET, considering USENET is less of a competitor to NYT than free newspapers or aggregators.
"The hardware companies hate to share revenue"
Do the content providers like to share revenue?
"they tend to see any dollar spent on content as a dollar that can't be spent on another new gadget"
Odd that Apple used iTunes to drive the sales of their hardware then.
"Who do you think funds all this astroturfing? Look at Mike's sponsors."
Do you even know what astroturfing means?
"The countries that make mainly hardware support piracy and those that make big budget movies don't"
That seems very ironic considering the big studios founded Hollywood to avoid having to pay patent fees to hardware manufacturers.
Re: It all depends what level of proof that you want
"If you continue to poke at every lawsuit and invent increasingly sophistic rationalizations to help the lazy, cheapass couch potatoes weasel out of pulling their weight, the cops are going to do what you ask of them. They're going to get better proof and that means more extensive wiretapping."
If you continue to poke at every innovation and invent increasingly sophistic rationalisations to help the lazy, cheapass studio potatoes weasel out of pulling their weight, the consumers are going to do what you ask of them. They're going to stop consuming unlawful content and that means only supporting free content.
Hey, it makes about as much sense as your version.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
'I think of "an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected" or the related "the incongruity of this" as the primary meaning for "irony." '
"an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected" is usually referred to as situational irony and is the type most used in the Alanis Morrisette song people love to criticise. Situational irony is a relatively new definition and probably the most contentious.
"the incongruity of this" is probably closer to dramatic irony than situational irony, as it would seem to apply to the idea of an observer seeing something an actor is ignorant of.
'I'm surprised to see what amounts to the definition of a "pun" or "sarcasm" as the #1 definition in some references.'
It's probably considered the most used definition. Socratic irony has the best pedigree but is definitely not the most used definition.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
"I only said there's support for piracy, not necessarily support for piracy in exclusion to any other form of consumption."
Thank you for clarifying. I'll agree with your view that there are a fair amount of commenters who support piracy, me included.
Bonus points to Mr Dodd for not only equating copyright infringement to theft, but also compounding the error. At least he didn't say 'That's literally what is happening', I suppose.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
"I'm not referring to people who say they'll only use songs that are legitimately distributed for free by their authors, etc."
That wasn't what I was getting at. It's an important distinction because people who don't pay for some things potentially spend more on what they do pay for. Plus, I rarely see anyone on Techdirt who claims to never pay for anything (but plenty on TorrentFreak) and as you mention there being some in this thread, I would be grateful if you could point them out.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Slight flaw in the AC's logic
"You can't own an Idea"'
Odd that the commenter I think you're referring to said pretty much the opposite: "You own that thought". Your whole comment seems to be arguing against things no one appears to have said.
On the post: Funniest/Most Insightful Comments Of The Week At Techdirt
Re: Slight flaw in the AC's logic
"You can't own an Idea"'
Odd that the commenter I think you're referring to said pretty much the opposite: "You own that thought". Your whole comment seems to be arguing against things no one appears to have said.
On the post: Capitalist Lion Tamer's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I had wanted to do my favourites post as a poem but lacked the time. I liked your last one, more would be good. I should start writing again then it may not take me so long to do one off the cuff.
On the post: Capitalist Lion Tamer's Favorite Techdirt Posts Of The Week
Funny
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re: Re: Re: Re: This should never happen
It can't. Evidence: me.
"A robot does what it is programmed to do? We do what we want. We can choose what to do. "
The sort of robot I was referring to is the sort defined in Issac Asimov's books. Fully self aware artificial life forms with certain rules at the core of their programming. AI that is able to choose, to want, but designed to adhere to certain principles.
"You could not define us by our own current definition of robot and no religious book defines us as such."
Well, I wasn't suggesting that we're literally robots.
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re: Re: Re:
why do you assume otherwise."
Mental people? What's that, like imaginary friends or some such?
Anyway, my point was that 'reasonable discussion' is a pretty arbitrary bar for deciding who gets rights. Mentally handicapped people, for example, do get rights whether they are capable of discussing them or not.
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re: Re: Re: Eternity
Obviously. But if the distinction is entirely non existent then what was the basis for the joke?
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re: Eternity
If you believe that we were given rights by God, then how do you feel able to decide animals are more worthy than AI? Is that distinction made somewhere in the bible?
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re: Re: This should never happen
But when God does it, it's special. When men do it, they're playing at God. Basically, religion would have us believe that we're robots with something akin to Asimov's law coded in our souls.
On the post: When Will We Have To Grant Artificial Intelligence Personhood?
Re:
Does that mean we can take the rights from humans with whom you can't have that discussion?
On the post: Does Hollywood Deserve Its Own Patriot Act?
Re: Re: Re: Re: It all depends what level of proof that you want
USENET gives access to more than the content of one newspaper. It seems telling that you choose to compare NYT to USENET, considering USENET is less of a competitor to NYT than free newspapers or aggregators.
"The hardware companies hate to share revenue"
Do the content providers like to share revenue?
"they tend to see any dollar spent on content as a dollar that can't be spent on another new gadget"
Odd that Apple used iTunes to drive the sales of their hardware then.
"Who do you think funds all this astroturfing? Look at Mike's sponsors."
Do you even know what astroturfing means?
"The countries that make mainly hardware support piracy and those that make big budget movies don't"
That seems very ironic considering the big studios founded Hollywood to avoid having to pay patent fees to hardware manufacturers.
On the post: Does Hollywood Deserve Its Own Patriot Act?
Re: It all depends what level of proof that you want
If you continue to poke at every innovation and invent increasingly sophistic rationalisations to help the lazy, cheapass studio potatoes weasel out of pulling their weight, the consumers are going to do what you ask of them. They're going to stop consuming unlawful content and that means only supporting free content.
Hey, it makes about as much sense as your version.
On the post: Author Of Ridiculous 'Piracy' Report Defends Conclusions, Ignores Questions About Methodology
Re:
To kick a puppy?
On the post: Barnes & Noble Forbids Photos & Word Of Mouth Promotion With Bogus Copyright Claim
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Still, the same issues should apply, I think.
On the post: Barnes & Noble Forbids Photos & Word Of Mouth Promotion With Bogus Copyright Claim
Re: Re: Re:
I recall a story where people also used such apps to identify books to buy for resale.
On the post: No Info Can Be Found About Mysterious Report Claiming Australia As A 'Nation Of Pirates'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
"an outcome of events contrary to what was, or might have been, expected" is usually referred to as situational irony and is the type most used in the Alanis Morrisette song people love to criticise. Situational irony is a relatively new definition and probably the most contentious.
"the incongruity of this" is probably closer to dramatic irony than situational irony, as it would seem to apply to the idea of an observer seeing something an actor is ignorant of.
'I'm surprised to see what amounts to the definition of a "pun" or "sarcasm" as the #1 definition in some references.'
It's probably considered the most used definition. Socratic irony has the best pedigree but is definitely not the most used definition.
On the post: No Info Can Be Found About Mysterious Report Claiming Australia As A 'Nation Of Pirates'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
Thank you for clarifying. I'll agree with your view that there are a fair amount of commenters who support piracy, me included.
On the post: Inauspicious Start For Chris Dodd At MPAA; Starts Off With 'Infringement No Different Than Theft' Claim
Exactly!
On the post: No Info Can Be Found About Mysterious Report Claiming Australia As A 'Nation Of Pirates'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
That wasn't what I was getting at. It's an important distinction because people who don't pay for some things potentially spend more on what they do pay for. Plus, I rarely see anyone on Techdirt who claims to never pay for anything (but plenty on TorrentFreak) and as you mention there being some in this thread, I would be grateful if you could point them out.
On the post: No Info Can Be Found About Mysterious Report Claiming Australia As A 'Nation Of Pirates'
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Piracy violates creators' rights. It gives money to pirate websites that have no rights. What else is there?
That's an odd one to pick. Out of the list you're looking at I would suggest:
6. "the incongruity of this."
8. "an objectively or humorously sardonic utterance, disposition, quality, etc."
Nevertheless, it's a legitimate use of the word.
Next >>