"This can happen anywhere, it is just more news worthy when it happens in America because of the politics.""*
We know what you said, you're just completely wrong. In most developed countries gun deaths are rare and newsworthy. Politics has nothing to do with it, most cultures just don't accept such unfettered gun ownership and the well-proven consequences.
"The lack of intellectual stimulation around here is more than abundant."
Tries to insult the intelligence of others using big words, butchers the English language instead...
"I am not advancing a cause, I am trying to inform you that you have been divisively politicized to the point where you cannot hold a meaningful discussion."
Not sure if you realize how hard you're projecting here. There's nothing political about wanting to reduce gun violence, that's just basic human decency. On the other hand the staunch defence of gun rights in the face of overwhelming international evidence of the success of gun control laws is steeped in partisan politics and political corruption.
"You remind me of the admonition for not having arguments with idiots."
Again, avoid using the big words, you're not great with them.
Re: Re: Well, this is the place to learn about sneaky tricks and unwritten rules -- but only applied to dissenters! VILE AD HOM IS OKAY IF YOU'RE A FANBOY!
"The humans (Mike Masnick and helpers) behind Techdirt obviously moderate...where do you suppose weekly "editor's choice" awards come from?"
WTF? That's not moderation. That's not even vaguely related to moderation. The editors choices are simply comments selected from those with high vote counts.
"How do you suppose those "flag" choices get converted to hidden comments, especially in the presence of ill-behaved visitors who flag at random? Make accidental clicks?"
The process of hiding comments that receive a certain number of flags is easily automated. Any any flag, accidental or not, can be undone by clicking again.
Thank you Captain Obvious, you've (repeatedly) made the point that everyone already understands. Nobody here is criticizing small ISP's that stick to NN principles and don't fuck over their customers.
"Its funny how you guys will act like these shitty rules are now awesome just because they are less shitty than the existing shitty rules."
It's funny how you think blatantly lying about other peoples' opinions makes for something resembling an argument. Nobody here has ever used the word awesome to describe the current rules, and there has been plenty of criticism of them while acknowledging they're miles better than nothing.
"All I need to do to get you to like shit, is to bring even shittier shit than the shit I brought last time. Then you all of a sudden become happy with the old shit."
And that's a perfectly normal reaction to any similar situation. If you were only allowed to eat bread and water, and then were denied even that, I'm pretty sure you'd really miss that damn bread and water. Again, this is a very lame excuse for an argument.
"We are going to lose NN entirely because you clowns don't even understand how to property fight it."
And what exactly are you doing to fight it "properly"? For all this big-man talk you must surely be doing something to show up all up right? Or are you just another keyboard warrior like you think everyone else is?
"If an ISP says, "Hey! Do you like Netflix? We do too! So we partnered with Netflix to offer you a smooth streaming experience!"
Why should that be illegal?"
If you're seriously asking this question at this point in the NN debate you're either really new to the topic or being deliberately obtuse. The main crux of NN is not letting the large established players pay for better market position, effectively locking out smaller competitors tp cant afford to do the same. Do you really want Netflix to be the only option? That's called a monopoly remember, we're trying to avoid those.
"If I don't want Netflix, why would I care if my ISP slows it down?"
MAybe because others do want Netflix and you're not a selfish prick? No?
"And if my ISP slows it down, I can use a different ISP that doesn't."
Chances are you can't. Again, claiming there's serious competition in this market makes you look ignorant or disingenuous.
"I might understand if I needed Netflix, or any other website, to stay alive, but I don't."
Netflix is just one example, this all applies to any internet service. And if you think this requires a life or death situation before we should care, maybe you are just a prick...
Re: Re: H.R. 4682 will stop states from doing this
So the ISP's are going to take the state government to court to force the award of contracts they missed out on because of anti-consumer behavior? That'll be a great look...
"So I would express my full support for Rep. Blackburn, on the grounds that anything opposed by double-standard promoting leftists is most likely in fact a good thing."
In other words you're just too damn stupid to consider the facts for yourself and come up with an opinion on your own, so you'll blindly follow a bought-and-paid-for politician who is actively working against your best interests. Of do you actually want your internet service to be even slower and more expensive? Is that some weird new conservative life goal?
""Had Dick lived longer, he would have made a lot of money. Had he made a lot of money and then died, he would have left that money to his children. Given those basic facts, not allowing his copyrights to pass to his children seems like it's effectively punishing the families of people who die young."*
And for every PKD there's a thousand dead artists who did not become successful after death, so that seems like a pretty weak reason for excessive copyright terms. Any family is punished in numerous ways when people die young. Why do artists' families deserve special treatment?
Re: Re: Re: Now, now, kids: relying on technicalities likely means DOOMED.
That's NOT a technicality, it's an extremely important part of the justice system. Protections like this were put in place because of rampant historical abuse by the authorities. You absolutely should but be belittling them, since you obviously don't know where they came from.
On the post: Anti-NRA Censorship Efforts Echo Earlier Pro-NRA Censorship Efforts, And Learn No Lessons From Them
Re: Re: Re: Re:
"...if you want to stop gun violence, the only way to do that is to ban all guns."
Nobody's actually expecting to stop all gun violence, just reduce it dramatically so it's a bit more aligned with the rest of the developed world.
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"Another "we are right because majority" claim?"
If you call having far fewer gun deaths 'right', then yeah I guess so.
"Well-Proven? I guess a little humor is always welcome."
Not sure what's so funny about the stark difference between the US's guns death stats and those of other countries.
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Freedom is messy
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
*"What I said...
"This can happen anywhere, it is just more news worthy when it happens in America because of the politics.""*
We know what you said, you're just completely wrong. In most developed countries gun deaths are rare and newsworthy. Politics has nothing to do with it, most cultures just don't accept such unfettered gun ownership and the well-proven consequences.
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"You guys really need to stop making false equivalents!"
Stop trying to use the big words! You suck at it.
On the post: Right On Time: Kentucky Governor Lays The Blame For Florida School Shooting At The Feet Of Video Games
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
"The lack of intellectual stimulation around here is more than abundant."
Tries to insult the intelligence of others using big words, butchers the English language instead...
"I am not advancing a cause, I am trying to inform you that you have been divisively politicized to the point where you cannot hold a meaningful discussion."
Not sure if you realize how hard you're projecting here. There's nothing political about wanting to reduce gun violence, that's just basic human decency. On the other hand the staunch defence of gun rights in the face of overwhelming international evidence of the success of gun control laws is steeped in partisan politics and political corruption.
"You remind me of the admonition for not having arguments with idiots."
Again, avoid using the big words, you're not great with them.
On the post: We Need To Shine A Light On Private Online Censorship
Re: Re: Well, this is the place to learn about sneaky tricks and unwritten rules -- but only applied to dissenters! VILE AD HOM IS OKAY IF YOU'RE A FANBOY!
"The humans (Mike Masnick and helpers) behind Techdirt obviously moderate...where do you suppose weekly "editor's choice" awards come from?"
WTF? That's not moderation. That's not even vaguely related to moderation. The editors choices are simply comments selected from those with high vote counts.
"How do you suppose those "flag" choices get converted to hidden comments, especially in the presence of ill-behaved visitors who flag at random? Make accidental clicks?"
The process of hiding comments that receive a certain number of flags is easily automated. Any any flag, accidental or not, can be undone by clicking again.
On the post: AT&T's Bogus 'Internet Bill Of Rights' Aims To Undermine Net Neutrality, Foist Regulation Upon Silicon Valley Competitors
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: These are not ISPs...
On the post: AT&T's Bogus 'Internet Bill Of Rights' Aims To Undermine Net Neutrality, Foist Regulation Upon Silicon Valley Competitors
Re:
"Its funny how you guys will act like these shitty rules are now awesome just because they are less shitty than the existing shitty rules."
It's funny how you think blatantly lying about other peoples' opinions makes for something resembling an argument. Nobody here has ever used the word awesome to describe the current rules, and there has been plenty of criticism of them while acknowledging they're miles better than nothing.
"All I need to do to get you to like shit, is to bring even shittier shit than the shit I brought last time. Then you all of a sudden become happy with the old shit."
And that's a perfectly normal reaction to any similar situation. If you were only allowed to eat bread and water, and then were denied even that, I'm pretty sure you'd really miss that damn bread and water. Again, this is a very lame excuse for an argument.
"We are going to lose NN entirely because you clowns don't even understand how to property fight it."
And what exactly are you doing to fight it "properly"? For all this big-man talk you must surely be doing something to show up all up right? Or are you just another keyboard warrior like you think everyone else is?
On the post: Montana Says It Won't Do Business With Net Neutrality Violating ISPs
Re: Re: Re:
"If an ISP says, "Hey! Do you like Netflix? We do too! So we partnered with Netflix to offer you a smooth streaming experience!"
Why should that be illegal?"
If you're seriously asking this question at this point in the NN debate you're either really new to the topic or being deliberately obtuse. The main crux of NN is not letting the large established players pay for better market position, effectively locking out smaller competitors tp cant afford to do the same. Do you really want Netflix to be the only option? That's called a monopoly remember, we're trying to avoid those.
"If I don't want Netflix, why would I care if my ISP slows it down?"
MAybe because others do want Netflix and you're not a selfish prick? No?
"And if my ISP slows it down, I can use a different ISP that doesn't."
Chances are you can't. Again, claiming there's serious competition in this market makes you look ignorant or disingenuous.
"I might understand if I needed Netflix, or any other website, to stay alive, but I don't."
Netflix is just one example, this all applies to any internet service. And if you think this requires a life or death situation before we should care, maybe you are just a prick...
On the post: Montana Says It Won't Do Business With Net Neutrality Violating ISPs
Re: Re: H.R. 4682 will stop states from doing this
So the ISP's are going to take the state government to court to force the award of contracts they missed out on because of anti-consumer behavior? That'll be a great look...
On the post: Dashcam Recording Instantly Undercuts Officers' Concocted Reason For A Traffic Stop
Re:
On the post: After The 'Octopus Incident' White House Threatened To Stop 'Menacing Logos' From Spy Satellites
Not menacing?
"The good news is that neither Lewis nor Clark look menacing."
Not sure if is entirely agree with that. They look pretty grumpy to me, and they're armed...
On the post: Blackburn Doubles Down On A Decade Of Lies As She Pushes Fake Net Neutrality Law
Re: Re: Re:
Ignorance, stupidity, and greed are human values. ;)
On the post: Blackburn Doubles Down On A Decade Of Lies As She Pushes Fake Net Neutrality Law
Re:
"So I would express my full support for Rep. Blackburn, on the grounds that anything opposed by double-standard promoting leftists is most likely in fact a good thing."
In other words you're just too damn stupid to consider the facts for yourself and come up with an opinion on your own, so you'll blindly follow a bought-and-paid-for politician who is actively working against your best interests. Of do you actually want your internet service to be even slower and more expensive? Is that some weird new conservative life goal?
On the post: Copyright Maximalists Throw In The Towel On Term Extension; Admit That Maybe Copyright Is Too Long
Re: Re: Re: Re: Wow!
""Had Dick lived longer, he would have made a lot of money. Had he made a lot of money and then died, he would have left that money to his children. Given those basic facts, not allowing his copyrights to pass to his children seems like it's effectively punishing the families of people who die young."*
And for every PKD there's a thousand dead artists who did not become successful after death, so that seems like a pretty weak reason for excessive copyright terms. Any family is punished in numerous ways when people die young. Why do artists' families deserve special treatment?
On the post: The Gorilla Channel Satire Demonstrates The Ridiculousness Of Banning Fake News
Re: The worst fake news is from NYTimes or WashPo. -- You still believe the "Trump-Russia collusion"!
"However, we're not quite there yet, so if want to impeach Trump, still need some substance, not fictions."
So... we should have an investigation then?
On the post: MalwareTech Prosecution Appears To Be Falling Apart As Gov't Plays Keep Away With Documents Requested By Defense
Re: Re: Re: Now, now, kids: relying on technicalities likely means DOOMED.
On the post: Once Again: Expecting Social Media Companies To Police 'Bad' Stuff Is A Bad Idea
Re: Expecting BAD corporations to police bad people IS foolish, true...
"Common sense is so HARD for snowflakes!"
Ooh, look at you using a buzzword you think is edgy and insulting! So witty and clever! It's like you think we give a shit about it...
Next >>