Just for starters, the plea bargaining system is not necessary. In fact, there are places where it is not allowed.
One fun way not to clog your court system is to not press charges against someone who is merely violating the terms of service of a company who has already settled the issue with them.
Specifically, I am talking about bank financing, which I repeat I do not see a lot here. The idea here seems to be to get artists to go out and use the technology that exists to just go out and entertain, and that's all well and good. I like it. But for big budget art it has been repeatedly pointed out that this model does not seem to work.
The reason is that private capital is always going to be more expensive than bank capital, because banks are allowed to create new capital for lending, whereas private citizens and other organizations cannot.
I do not see this issue being addressed much here. I also wonder what the weird pull is among people here to try to accuse anyone who posts something they don't like of not reading the site often..... That's just weird. Really, who cares if I have been reading the site long? I just asked a question.
I had little awareness of him as an advocate of financial reform.
Am I missing something here at Tech Dirt, because I do not remember seeing anything, or not much, about financial reform on this blog as it pertains to IP. It seems he saw the connection fairly quickly.
Bringing China into this though raises a point I do not think most discussing these issues understand. No small part of why it is cheaper in China is the money market. Dollars buy more in China because of perceived power and reliability, which in turn is based on the strength of our banking system, our corporate system, our armed forces, and a lot of other things.
Finance turns on banking, and an entertainment market without IP is a market where the artist is left behind in terms of finance. The distributors can get finance. They are making hardware that everyone has to use. The artist cannot.
I'm not pro IP. In fact, I am rather rabidly anti IP. More so I think than the folks who run this site. But until the question of how IP deregulation interacts with finance as it pertains to getting loans, as opposed to collecting money from customers, it is not going to go very far. Getting loans is where it's at in modern finance. Private capital is more expensive than bank capital because people are not allowed to lend money they do not have. Banks are.
You're a libertarian and you think I'm an extremist. LOL!
You don't do language well. Here is an example.
"Not doing the intellectual work to understand that I DIDN'T say any of the above, only that I pointed out that NRA opponents COULD make that argument as an example of why the distinction the NRA is making is a weak one. The fact that you think I implied...."
To imply means to suggest. By agreeing with those who would paint these games as similarly violent to games where people are shot, you IMPLY that there is a legitimate point there. That's what that word means....
I don't know why you are so bent on getting yourself upset, but it's not anything anyone here is doing that is upsetting you. You appear to have a need to argue with people that you purportedly agree with.
Even if the focus is on mental health, how is it a good thing what the prosecution did?
It's been brought up many times. The prosecution knew he was struggling, and yet they trumped up these charges and kept piling on the pressure.
I don't think it was his friends and family that let him down. I think he came far to late to an understanding of human nature, and before he could drag himself through the process of coming to terms with it, he ended up capitulating to hopelessness and ended his life.
That may just be me projecting, but he and I seem to share a lot of similar values, especially where access to important information is concerned. How can we have a free and open society of informed citizens without more open information? How can we elect the correct officials without more open information?
And then the government does something this overboard, and society just sort of keeps on rolling along.......
That will eat at you if you have not prepared for yourself an internal dialogue that gets you out of the downward spiral that such thoughts can create.
We do seem to need to learn to be more concerned with our fellow man.
I have recently been thinking that, even worse, we as a species seem to have an ingrained pull towards humiliating people. It always reminds me of times I have seen a sick bird being mercilessly torn at by the rest of the flock. It's a very frightening and apparently innate biological drive common to many species to tear apart the weak.
Apropos of nothing I guess, except to say again how much I enjoyed your thoughts.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
You don't need two. You need to know that Tech Dirt supports the first amendment, and you need to acknowledge that this and the two posts it links to are anti second amendment, which pretty much everyone here who is pro second amendment is telling you it is.
At the very least it is awfully sloppy work if the goal was to avoid looking anti second amendment.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Of course it does. If target practice is violent in a video game, obviously this extends to real target practice, and hence to the idea of owning a gun for target practice.
Take a few deep breaths. You're in danger of splitting a blood vessel for no good reason.
This article IS anti second amendment. That's not the end of the universe. Heck, you look to be anti second amendment so you should be glad Tech Dirt supports your cause.
People own armored vehicles privately. People own planes privately. What exactly is your issue with them mounting a gun or weapon to them?
What is your position on guns carried by security guards?
All of your arguments are basically just you acting all shocked that anyone would disagree with you. I'm less afraid of my neighbors than I am of organizations like huge corporations and out of control governments. That's all it boils down to.
That and I have some sense of history that the vast majority of anti-gun nuts seem to lack.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
As I said before, the part of it that is anti Second Amendment is the REASON for the COMPLAINT.
Nothing in this article points to anything the NRA is doing that is all that bad. They say video games may cause violence. I think violent society causes violent video games. Psychologically there is a feedback loop of some sort there, for sure, as it is more or less impossible to separate motives from behaviors.
So their position on video games is based on reasonable assumptions, and they have gone on to make video games they feel send a healthier message than, say, Grand Theft Auto IV.
They're just lobbying for a more intentional culture, which is something I believe in deeply.
Is anyone aware of a central place where anyone is organizing actual, physical, demonstrations? I know Demand Progress has their online thing going on.
I think it bears pointing out that the video games, in and of themselves, are not the point the NRA is making. Violence in many instances is motivated by our culture, which includes video games, but extends to movies, tv, out day to day conversations, and so forth.
What conservatives, as opposed to specifically second amendment supporters do not seem to get, is that greed plays a very real role in creating a culture of violence as well.
Both in history and in the modern era, your assertions are not backed by reality. We won in Iraq and Afghanistan not simply because of superior firepower. Specifically in Afghanistan, the Soviets had superior firepower. They simply refused to work with the people. They had nuclear bombs, tanks, etc. It was their philosophy that lost them the war there, not their lack of hardware.
The only way tanks and planes win you a war like that is if you are willing to commit genocide.
Your argument just falls to pieces in the face of reality.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Releases Totally Bogus Statement Concerning The Aaron Swartz Prosecution
Re: Lessig is to Blame -- and So Are You
Just for starters, the plea bargaining system is not necessary. In fact, there are places where it is not allowed.
One fun way not to clog your court system is to not press charges against someone who is merely violating the terms of service of a company who has already settled the issue with them.
On the post: For Internet Freedom Day, Watch Aaron Swartz Explain How SOPA Was Stopped
Re: Re: Financial Reform!
Specifically, I am talking about bank financing, which I repeat I do not see a lot here. The idea here seems to be to get artists to go out and use the technology that exists to just go out and entertain, and that's all well and good. I like it. But for big budget art it has been repeatedly pointed out that this model does not seem to work.
The reason is that private capital is always going to be more expensive than bank capital, because banks are allowed to create new capital for lending, whereas private citizens and other organizations cannot.
I do not see this issue being addressed much here. I also wonder what the weird pull is among people here to try to accuse anyone who posts something they don't like of not reading the site often..... That's just weird. Really, who cares if I have been reading the site long? I just asked a question.
Got any handy links to go with that attitude?
On the post: For Internet Freedom Day, Watch Aaron Swartz Explain How SOPA Was Stopped
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: For Internet Freedom Day, Watch Aaron Swartz Explain How SOPA Was Stopped
Re: Saddened
Remember how two or three times Aaron mentioned whoever was behind this was good....
They're good. Damned good. And they got him, even though I don't think this is quite what they had in mind... they got him.
Fight, but fight smart and know your enemy. They are not fools.
On the post: For Internet Freedom Day, Watch Aaron Swartz Explain How SOPA Was Stopped
Financial Reform!
Am I missing something here at Tech Dirt, because I do not remember seeing anything, or not much, about financial reform on this blog as it pertains to IP. It seems he saw the connection fairly quickly.
On the post: Dear HBO, Disney, Netflix Et Al: Fragmenting Online TV Lets Piracy Keep Its Biggest Advantage
Re: Re: 'Works for hire"
Finance turns on banking, and an entertainment market without IP is a market where the artist is left behind in terms of finance. The distributors can get finance. They are making hardware that everyone has to use. The artist cannot.
I'm not pro IP. In fact, I am rather rabidly anti IP. More so I think than the folks who run this site. But until the question of how IP deregulation interacts with finance as it pertains to getting loans, as opposed to collecting money from customers, it is not going to go very far. Getting loans is where it's at in modern finance. Private capital is more expensive than bank capital because people are not allowed to lend money they do not have. Banks are.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Slants and Observations
You don't do language well. Here is an example.
"Not doing the intellectual work to understand that I DIDN'T say any of the above, only that I pointed out that NRA opponents COULD make that argument as an example of why the distinction the NRA is making is a weak one. The fact that you think I implied...."
To imply means to suggest. By agreeing with those who would paint these games as similarly violent to games where people are shot, you IMPLY that there is a legitimate point there. That's what that word means....
I don't know why you are so bent on getting yourself upset, but it's not anything anyone here is doing that is upsetting you. You appear to have a need to argue with people that you purportedly agree with.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Releases Totally Bogus Statement Concerning The Aaron Swartz Prosecution
Huh?
It's been brought up many times. The prosecution knew he was struggling, and yet they trumped up these charges and kept piling on the pressure.
I don't think it was his friends and family that let him down. I think he came far to late to an understanding of human nature, and before he could drag himself through the process of coming to terms with it, he ended up capitulating to hopelessness and ended his life.
That may just be me projecting, but he and I seem to share a lot of similar values, especially where access to important information is concerned. How can we have a free and open society of informed citizens without more open information? How can we elect the correct officials without more open information?
And then the government does something this overboard, and society just sort of keeps on rolling along.......
That will eat at you if you have not prepared for yourself an internal dialogue that gets you out of the downward spiral that such thoughts can create.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Releases Totally Bogus Statement Concerning The Aaron Swartz Prosecution
Do like
I have recently been thinking that, even worse, we as a species seem to have an ingrained pull towards humiliating people. It always reminds me of times I have seen a sick bird being mercilessly torn at by the rest of the flock. It's a very frightening and apparently innate biological drive common to many species to tear apart the weak.
Apropos of nothing I guess, except to say again how much I enjoyed your thoughts.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
At the very least it is awfully sloppy work if the goal was to avoid looking anti second amendment.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: This blog amazes me
"You keep using that word...."
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Take a few deep breaths. You're in danger of splitting a blood vessel for no good reason.
This article IS anti second amendment. That's not the end of the universe. Heck, you look to be anti second amendment so you should be glad Tech Dirt supports your cause.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Asked and answered
What is your position on guns carried by security guards?
All of your arguments are basically just you acting all shocked that anyone would disagree with you. I'm less afraid of my neighbors than I am of organizations like huge corporations and out of control governments. That's all it boils down to.
That and I have some sense of history that the vast majority of anti-gun nuts seem to lack.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
Nothing in this article points to anything the NRA is doing that is all that bad. They say video games may cause violence. I think violent society causes violent video games. Psychologically there is a feedback loop of some sort there, for sure, as it is more or less impossible to separate motives from behaviors.
So their position on video games is based on reasonable assumptions, and they have gone on to make video games they feel send a healthier message than, say, Grand Theft Auto IV.
They're just lobbying for a more intentional culture, which is something I believe in deeply.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
It concerns me a lot that people do not get the distinction.... A lot.
Good post.
On the post: Carmen Ortiz Releases Totally Bogus Statement Concerning The Aaron Swartz Prosecution
More stand taking
http://act.demandprogress.org/letter/aaron_justice/
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I think it bears pointing out that the video games, in and of themselves, are not the point the NRA is making. Violence in many instances is motivated by our culture, which includes video games, but extends to movies, tv, out day to day conversations, and so forth.
What conservatives, as opposed to specifically second amendment supporters do not seem to get, is that greed plays a very real role in creating a culture of violence as well.
On the post: NRA: Games To Blame For Violence! Also, Here's A Shooting Game For 4-Year-Olds!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: This blog amazes me
The only way tanks and planes win you a war like that is if you are willing to commit genocide.
Your argument just falls to pieces in the face of reality.
Next >>