If I believed for a moment that using the acronyms “TERF” or “FART” encouraged violence, I wouldn’t use them. But I don’t. So I will. If’n you don’t like it, get a userscript to block my posts.
Terf when used in the context Stephen did is not inciting violence towards women. Some people have adopted that, but I always see the term used to mock people for being anti-trans.
It's interesting that you see defending trans people as inherently violent.
Then why is everyone still running rhetorical rings around you, Blue?
I believe the answer to that is he really doesn't understand the arguments he is making. He runs over to Reason or InfoWars, sees something that looks neat like "Cabbage Law" or "A1 Racist" and runs back over here to make a half assed declaration.
Like when Burkhardt above pointed out that everything he just said was wrong and he declares All your truisms add up to an individual Right that the gov't is to enforce. Or how he looks askance at the actual dictionary definition of Common Law as wrong somehow.
As pointed out by like 5 different people just now, your law arguments are nonsense so I really can't answer them.
Copyright is a power of the government to restrict your speech to the benefit of corporations. Accepting copyright means accepting that corporations have authority over you. Enjoy your submission.
Fine. We agree that you look to the Federal Government to take away your rights, and enjoy that Corporations can steal your right to free speech.
I can live with that.
Free speech - that is a "Right" in your "unwritten laws" isn't it?
Careful how you toss around the stealing accusation. If I copy a song, I've made more! (Not theft.) When Corporations take your right of speech, you've lost it and that is actual theft.
You lose your right of ownership, right to privacy. As we've discussed many times (even in the article above.)
You give up the right of ownership on that nifty printer you use because it used copyrighted ink. And your neighbors John Deer Tractor can't be repaired, because it's a Federal Crime to tamper with the copyrighted software.
Common Law - the body of court decisions - for freakin everyone - supports the legality of copyright.
However did you ever notice that the concept of Copyright is embedded in the body of the constitution? Can you tell me what happens when a constitutional amendment is passed? It supersedes the previous? So the First Amendment abolishes copyright. (Just saying!)
Again - Copyright law gives your rights to Corporations.
It would be trivial to have encoded a unique customer ID instead of "You have been caught Red Handed." But someone just wanted to cry wolf at Google...
On the post: No, Your Kid Isn't Growing Horns Because Of Cellphone Use
Science Reporting...
Why are all newspapers so bad at science reporting?
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Filters
Hey if all your email and posts have to be scanned before they are allowed, that seems like a pretty big assault on your right to privacy.
But if Copyright means the right of corporations to do that, then I'm sure it was what the founders hand in mind, right? /s
On the post: Self-Described Feminist Loses Lawsuit Against Twitter For Banning Her Account
Re:
If I believed for a moment that using the acronyms “TERF” or “FART” encouraged violence, I wouldn’t use them. But I don’t. So I will. If’n you don’t like it, get a userscript to block my posts.
Terf when used in the context Stephen did is not inciting violence towards women. Some people have adopted that, but I always see the term used to mock people for being anti-trans.
It's interesting that you see defending trans people as inherently violent.
On the post: Appeals Court Reminds Deputies That Standing By While Rights Are Violated Is No Better Than Violating Them Yourself
Re: Re: If the deputies' logic held true...
If his explanation required an explanation, I stand by my opinion that he wasn't making a great analogie.
On the post: Self-Described Feminist Loses Lawsuit Against Twitter For Banning Her Account
Re: Re:
Can you please say that once again, this time in a manner that the rest of us in the English-speaking world can understand?
What part of that didn't you understand? FART is an alternate (and better, IMHO) to TERF.
On the post: Self-Described Feminist Loses Lawsuit Against Twitter For Banning Her Account
Re: Re: BLUE admits that he wants "Gary" censored
Hey remember when you said I should be censored, while condemning anyone that would moderate you?
Your numbered arguments aren't supported by actual facts. And they don't actually lead to a conclusion.
Last I checked you were the one claiming that Corporations had the right to restrict speech - and were fine with it.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Re:
Then why is everyone still running rhetorical rings around you, Blue?
I believe the answer to that is he really doesn't understand the arguments he is making. He runs over to Reason or InfoWars, sees something that looks neat like "Cabbage Law" or "A1 Racist" and runs back over here to make a half assed declaration.
Like when Burkhardt above pointed out that everything he just said was wrong and he declares All your truisms add up to an individual Right that the gov't is to enforce. Or how he looks askance at the actual dictionary definition of Common Law as wrong somehow.
On the post: Self-Described Feminist Loses Lawsuit Against Twitter For Banning Her Account
Re: Defending corporate EULA? Really?
it's a big problem that so much of our culture is locked up in these copyrighted but quasi-public spaces
Maybe Copyright is the real problem, and ownership culture that keeps our culture locked up.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copytheft
meaning you've no basis in Law
As pointed out by like 5 different people just now, your law arguments are nonsense so I really can't answer them.
Copyright is a power of the government to restrict your speech to the benefit of corporations. Accepting copyright means accepting that corporations have authority over you. Enjoy your submission.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Copytheft
Fine. We agree that you look to the Federal Government to take away your rights, and enjoy that Corporations can steal your right to free speech.
I can live with that.
Free speech - that is a "Right" in your "unwritten laws" isn't it?
Careful how you toss around the stealing accusation. If I copy a song, I've made more! (Not theft.) When Corporations take your right of speech, you've lost it and that is actual theft.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Re: Re: Copytheft
Copyright is granted by the Feds. You love the Feds having authority over you, right?
Yawn Not going to pick at your nonsense phrases in bold, thanks.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Re: Re: Copytheft
You lose your right of ownership, right to privacy. As we've discussed many times (even in the article above.)
You give up the right of ownership on that nifty printer you use because it used copyrighted ink. And your neighbors John Deer Tractor can't be repaired, because it's a Federal Crime to tamper with the copyrighted software.
Common Law - the body of court decisions - for freakin everyone - supports the legality of copyright.
However did you ever notice that the concept of Copyright is embedded in the body of the constitution? Can you tell me what happens when a constitutional amendment is passed? It supersedes the previous? So the First Amendment abolishes copyright. (Just saying!)
Again - Copyright law gives your rights to Corporations.
On the post: Can't Have Copyright Enforcement Without Destroying Privacy Protections
Copytheft
Copyright steal your rights and hands them over to large corporations.
Seems pretty clear to me.
On the post: Dish To Buy Parts of T-Mobile To Save Sprint Merger, But It's Not Likely To Help
Re:
The proposal submittal fee is $20million, and you must apply in person at a Trump owned hotel or resort.
On the post: Genius/Google Dispute Gets Even Dumber: Microsoft And Amazon Show Same 'Coded' Lyrics, But Genius Doesn't Care
Re:
... perhaps LyricFind had more than one customer?
It would be trivial to have encoded a unique customer ID instead of "You have been caught Red Handed." But someone just wanted to cry wolf at Google...
On the post: Appeals Court Reminds Deputies That Standing By While Rights Are Violated Is No Better Than Violating Them Yourself
Re: If the deputies' logic held true...
Funny how their interpretation of how the rules should work is always different for cops...
Wait, are you actually using the Central Park Five as an analogy to defend the cops in this case? You are really bad at analogies.
On the post: Kim Kardashian Deep Fake Video Removed By Copyright Claim
Re:
Interesting that you should bring this up because the proposal relating to Deepfakes is not so well defined at all.
On the post: Appeals Court Reminds Deputies That Standing By While Rights Are Violated Is No Better Than Violating Them Yourself
Re:
Censored, thanks for playing.
On the post: Appeals Court Reminds Deputies That Standing By While Rights Are Violated Is No Better Than Violating Them Yourself
Re: Re:Troll Liar
Hey Bro, didn't you promise to leave? Just another lie...
On the post: Kim Kardashian Deep Fake Video Removed By Copyright Claim
Deep Dish
Also, the next time I am in Chi-Town I will pop for some deep-dish pizza and beers if I can get a selfie with my soul-brother Tim!
Next >>