Masnick runs his mouth safely behind a monitor in a way he wouldn't dare to anyone's face
Have you listened to the podcast? He's had several episodes which consist of him participating in some sort of panel, espousing these same opinions in person to the live audience and the other panelists as he does on here.
You could say a lot of things about Mike, but moral inconsistency of this kind is most certainly not one of them.
This site is just a stupid little echo chamber that will never influence policy. Everything he supports keeps losing and losing and losing.
Wow. Just wow. How long have you been hanging around here?
Just off the top of my head, one of the most notable things he supported was resisting SOPA and ACTA. These both got shot down in Congress, and he's had notable people, both elected representatives and senior staff members of elected representatives, come around here and talk about how Techdirt's coverage was instrumental in helping them understand why these were bad bills that they needed to shut down.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
Nobody is confused or ignorant here. In this day and age it's not like explanations or apologetics on the libertarian perspective are at all difficult to come by. For heaven's sake, you guys are like freaking vegans: you'll take any excuse to shoehorn your beliefs into any conversation and pontificate on why it's supposedly a morally superior system!
Also, your "offer" comes off as incredibly condescending, and still would even if we didn't already know what it would contain.
What you appear to be missing is that the perspective of normal people is that your ideology is nothing more than a bunch of fancy words to dress up the "philosophy" of the five-year-old (No! I don't want to and you can't make me!) and make it look morally acceptable to grown-ups, and that the grown-ups who are actually emotionally mature find this repugnant, particularly in the context of all of the real-world evil and suffering that this philosophy has ended up causing.
To a certain degree, yes. However, a lot of the legal protections associated with copyright are either diminished or nonexistent if you didn't register. Not all of them, sure, but it's by no means as simple as "it's automatic and you have no need to register."
If you honestly don't understand the nuances of this, it kinda calls your self-proclaimed credentials as a copyright attorney into question...
> You think they don't have the data on how often you pause?
They don't have the data on what I've been drinking. Without that, the pause information (which they probably do have) can't tell them enough to distinguish whether I have a bladder problem or am just over-hydrated.
> The same goes if Netflix is determining my bladder health by how often I pause.
I certainly hope not; they don't have the data for something like that.
Even assuming, just for the sake of argument, that the only possible reason for a pause of a certain length is a bathroom break, how often I feel like taking one has far more to do with how much water I've drunk recently than anything related to my health. (Assuming, again for the sake of simplicity, that the amount of water I'm drinking is not itself unhealthy.)
Given the way he seems to be treating the Presidency largely (though admittedly not entirely) as a vehicle for further expanding his own wealth and that of his family, I'd say it's not unfair to claim that his business is more important than being POTUS for Predident Trump himself!
I'm talking about your repeated requests to multiple people to continue this conversation elsewhere, to move it away from here, where everyone is calling you on the crap you're posting, to a friendlier venue under your personal control.
Agreed. There's precedent for it, with the SHIELD Act protecting Americans from foreign defamation claims that would not be valid under US defamation law. We just need to expand on that foundation.
Far be it from me to defend a company as inherently abusive as Apple, but in this particular case I don't see anything wrong with what they did. When you have a large amount of data, returning it as a machine-readable format such as CSV (which can be trivially read into Excel) or JSON is absolutely the right answer.
Large data sets are very difficult to read the way a normal human being would read a book, from beginning to end. Instead, what you want to do with that sort of data is subject it to analysis, and for that you need some format that's easy to parse by a computer, which can then search through it and help the user work out points that are of interest.
If the GDPR doesn't recognize this simple fact, it's just another point demonstrating that it's a bad law.
right up there with tinfoil hats and other nuttery
Keep in mind that you're talking to someone who not only admits to being a libertarian, but appears to be proud of it. "Tinfoil hats and other nuttery" are par for the course.
Why do you keep asking this? You seem to be implying that only people who hold a certain number of vaguely-defined "profitable copyrights" has any room to offer opinions on the subject.
But why should that be? That's not a principle that applies elsewhere.
Should only professional athletes be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about sports?
Should only addicts be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about the opioid crisis?
Should only elected officials be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about politics?
Should only ordained ministers be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about religion?
Between responses to me and to the other guy, you keep trying to take this discussion private, out of the public space where you started it. Why is that?
I understand why failure to have a principled view on this leads to confused and murky analysis.
No you don't, as your previous comment makes painfully clear. You are blinded by the poison of libertarianism, to the point where you apparently can't even recognize the existence of actual principles that conflict with your poisonous ideology, as evidenced by the way you label arguments derived from them "unprincipled."
the problem is that the tech-libertarians are not real libertarians
You're the one who brought up the term, so you don't have much room to complain about it being a problem.
It's like someone talking about vitamin supplements and saying "since this isn't natural food, it's poison. But it's a special kind of poison that's beneficial to people, so it's good-poison." If it's not actually poison, don't call it libertarianism!
Re: Re: Re: 'You kicked our car's tire, we'll be taking your car
Agreed.
I'm reminded of the story Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. It's widely considered one of the greatest fan works ever created. It starts with the premise that instead of a loser like Vernon Dursley, Aunt Petunia had married a scientist instead, a good man who had raised the orphaned Harry with love and taught him about science. And then Harry gets the letter from Hogwarts, discovers magic is real, and starts using his scientific training to wreak havoc on the entire storyline.
Despite being a derivative work, it's extremely original in what it does with the story of Harry Potter, and worthy of recognition as a creative work in its own right. But according to the legal status quo, it has no inherent right to exist and is only still out there because the Harry Potter rightsholders have not chosen to exercise their prerogative to get rid of it.
There's something fundamentally wrong with that state of affairs.
On the post: Max Schrems Files New Privacy Complaints That Seem To Show The Impossibility Of Complying With The GDPR
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Have you listened to the podcast? He's had several episodes which consist of him participating in some sort of panel, espousing these same opinions in person to the live audience and the other panelists as he does on here.
You could say a lot of things about Mike, but moral inconsistency of this kind is most certainly not one of them.
Wow. Just wow. How long have you been hanging around here?
Just off the top of my head, one of the most notable things he supported was resisting SOPA and ACTA. These both got shot down in Congress, and he's had notable people, both elected representatives and senior staff members of elected representatives, come around here and talk about how Techdirt's coverage was instrumental in helping them understand why these were bad bills that they needed to shut down.
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
Nobody is confused or ignorant here. In this day and age it's not like explanations or apologetics on the libertarian perspective are at all difficult to come by. For heaven's sake, you guys are like freaking vegans: you'll take any excuse to shoehorn your beliefs into any conversation and pontificate on why it's supposedly a morally superior system!
Also, your "offer" comes off as incredibly condescending, and still would even if we didn't already know what it would contain.
What you appear to be missing is that the perspective of normal people is that your ideology is nothing more than a bunch of fancy words to dress up the "philosophy" of the five-year-old (No! I don't want to and you can't make me!) and make it look morally acceptable to grown-ups, and that the grown-ups who are actually emotionally mature find this repugnant, particularly in the context of all of the real-world evil and suffering that this philosophy has ended up causing.
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re:
For sufficiently small values of "willing."
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
If you honestly don't understand the nuances of this, it kinda calls your self-proclaimed credentials as a copyright attorney into question...
On the post: Max Schrems Files New Privacy Complaints That Seem To Show The Impossibility Of Complying With The GDPR
Re: Re: Re: Re:
They don't have the data on what I've been drinking. Without that, the pause information (which they probably do have) can't tell them enough to distinguish whether I have a bladder problem or am just over-hydrated.
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re:
It wouldn't surprise me if there were a few of them--a very small number--and it also wouldn't surprise me to find there are none.
On the post: Max Schrems Files New Privacy Complaints That Seem To Show The Impossibility Of Complying With The GDPR
Re: Re:
I certainly hope not; they don't have the data for something like that.
Even assuming, just for the sake of argument, that the only possible reason for a pause of a certain length is a bathroom break, how often I feel like taking one has far more to do with how much water I've drunk recently than anything related to my health. (Assuming, again for the sake of simplicity, that the amount of water I'm drinking is not itself unhealthy.)
On the post: Trump Hotel Fracas Highlights How T-Mobile's Consumer-Friendly Brand Schtick Is Wearing A Little Thin
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Gasp
Given the way he seems to be treating the Presidency largely (though admittedly not entirely) as a vehicle for further expanding his own wealth and that of his family, I'd say it's not unfair to claim that his business is more important than being POTUS for Predident Trump himself!
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re:
What "sweeping generations" (generalizations?) did I make? Are you confusing me with some other participant in this conversation, perhaps?
On the post: Techdirt Podcast Episode 195: The EU Endangers Free Speech Online... Again
Re:
On the post: Max Schrems Files New Privacy Complaints That Seem To Show The Impossibility Of Complying With The GDPR
Re: Re: Re: Re: typo: noyb
Far be it from me to defend a company as inherently abusive as Apple, but in this particular case I don't see anything wrong with what they did. When you have a large amount of data, returning it as a machine-readable format such as CSV (which can be trivially read into Excel) or JSON is absolutely the right answer.
Large data sets are very difficult to read the way a normal human being would read a book, from beginning to end. Instead, what you want to do with that sort of data is subject it to analysis, and for that you need some format that's easy to parse by a computer, which can then search through it and help the user work out points that are of interest.
If the GDPR doesn't recognize this simple fact, it's just another point demonstrating that it's a bad law.
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
Keep in mind that you're talking to someone who not only admits to being a libertarian, but appears to be proud of it. "Tinfoil hats and other nuttery" are par for the course.
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re:
Why do you keep asking this? You seem to be implying that only people who hold a certain number of vaguely-defined "profitable copyrights" has any room to offer opinions on the subject.
But why should that be? That's not a principle that applies elsewhere.
Should only professional athletes be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about sports?
Should only addicts be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about the opioid crisis?
Should only elected officials be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about politics?
Should only ordained ministers be recognized as having anything worthwhile to say about religion?
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: Re: Missing the point
No you don't, as your previous comment makes painfully clear. You are blinded by the poison of libertarianism, to the point where you apparently can't even recognize the existence of actual principles that conflict with your poisonous ideology, as evidenced by the way you label arguments derived from them "unprincipled."
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Missing the point
You're the one who brought up the term, so you don't have much room to complain about it being a problem.
It's like someone talking about vitamin supplements and saying "since this isn't natural food, it's poison. But it's a special kind of poison that's beneficial to people, so it's good-poison." If it's not actually poison, don't call it libertarianism!
On the post: Lucasfilm Steps In After FanFilm That Tried To Follow The Rules Was Claimed By Disney Over Star Wars Music
Re: Re: Re: 'You kicked our car's tire, we'll be taking your car
Agreed.
I'm reminded of the story Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality. It's widely considered one of the greatest fan works ever created. It starts with the premise that instead of a loser like Vernon Dursley, Aunt Petunia had married a scientist instead, a good man who had raised the orphaned Harry with love and taught him about science. And then Harry gets the letter from Hogwarts, discovers magic is real, and starts using his scientific training to wreak havoc on the entire storyline.
Despite being a derivative work, it's extremely original in what it does with the story of Harry Potter, and worthy of recognition as a creative work in its own right. But according to the legal status quo, it has no inherent right to exist and is only still out there because the Harry Potter rightsholders have not chosen to exercise their prerogative to get rid of it.
There's something fundamentally wrong with that state of affairs.
Next >>