Live data from Hacker News

The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

thepiratebay.se

121–130 of 146 posts

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#121
post #98
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who say that copyright laws are evil are generally the same people who say the laws that make DDOS attacks a felony are criminalizing "the digital equivalent of a sit-in"... but only when the DDOS is being carried out by people they agree with.

I can't speak for everyone, but when the US gov or the MPAA DDOS's a website they disagree with, I'm not angry because what they are doing is illegal, I'm angry about the hypocrisy in declaring something to be both legally and morally wrong, except when it serves their purposes.

When have they done that?

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#122
post #98
post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The people who say that copyright laws are evil are generally the same people who say the laws that make DDOS attacks a felony are criminalizing "the digital equivalent of a sit-in"... but only when the DDOS is being carried out by people they agree with.

I can't speak for everyone, but when the US gov or the MPAA DDOS's a website they disagree with, I'm not angry because what they are doing is illegal, I'm angry about the hypocrisy in declaring something to be both legally and morally wrong, except when it serves their purposes.

When have they done that?

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#123
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The DRM argument for piracy is a bit of a straw man. Music hasn't been sold with DRM for over three years, but it still makes up a sizable portion of The Pirate Bay's offerings. You could say that musicians are being tyrannical by choosing to distribute their recordings in the way that maximizes their profit instead of choosing to give it away. I would reply that some people do choose to give away their work. I'm hap…

DRM for music is deeply entrenched in the ecosystem. The most overt of DRM layers can't exist on old media CDs, but it's still everywhere. None of the major online music services allow unlimited sharing (of files), and even getting this far was a long legal mess, representing part of the extensive history where DRM has attempted to parasitize the legal system. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/07/are-google-mus…

I mostly agree with your message (intent) but you're using the wrong word, DRM, when you in fact meant Intellectual Property (IP).

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Care to elaborate? I'm not a driver myself, so I haven't had to experience speed limits first hand. What's the problem with just driving under the posted speed limit?

Usually, posting an Ayn Rand quote on the Internet is a good way to start a flame war. But there's one quote in particular that few intelligent people will disagree with, and that even fewer will be able to dispute. “There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals, one makes them. One declares so many things to be…

My God, this is entirely, entirely, wrong. When you speed, you're JUST as culpable of killing someone whether you actually kill them or not. This is an old ethics issue: you can imagine two scenarios, both of which you do exactly the same actions: speeding down a road. The difference is that in one of them, a pedestrian doesn't see you bearing down on him, and you kill him. The pedestrian may or may not be there, but in one scenario, you're a monster, and in the other, you're just a speeder - even though your actions are identical in each case!

The right answer is that you're a monster in BOTH scenarios, and you should never fucking speed.

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Shit happens. Speeding makes it much worse when it does. Statistics repeatedly fail to bear out your assertion. Promised increases in death rates that accompany increased highway speed limits essentially never materialize. Modeling drivers as ideal gas particles whose collision rate is proportional to speed is simply wrong.

When in a hole, stop digging. > Statistics repeatedly fail to bear out your assertion. Except they don't: http://www.census.gov/compendia/statab/2012/tables/12s1108.p... More interestingly: http://www.trb.org/Main/Blurbs/157220.aspx I'll leave off the usual pedestrian fatality statistics here, because you seem not to be interested in that, and it's shooting fish in a barrel. > Promised increases in death rates that a…

I present this more as a interesting anecdote than a real argument but the fatality rate on the roads in Germany (where the autobhans have no enforced speed limit and seeing someone drive at 150mph is not uncommon) is considerably lower than in the US.

The reason this isn't a particularly great comparison is that driver training, car design and even the German attitude to driving are all built around the potential for high speeds.

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#126
post #56

Earlier quoted context omitted.

1. Speed limits are slow and people are impatient. 55 MPH on a highway feels quite pokey in clear conditions when 75 MPH is easily possible with no appreciable loss in safety. And 30 MPH on surface streets is positively crawling. They are designed low knowing that the average user will exceed them, similar to the MPAA's tax on blank recording media where the expectation of violating is built into the product. 2. Blen…

So, I'm not a traffic engineer, but I do work with several on different projects. In the city, speed limits are not designed for revenue or assuming most people will exceed them. They are designed because that is the safest speed to drive. They assume several things here: 1. Non-ideal conditions with many traffic lights require slower speed limits. 2. Views are often blocked by building, landscaping etc. 3. There are…

In the end they are set by politicians. Not for malicious reasons; politicians don't need to be malicious in order to make bad decisions, they have plenty of other reasons for that. In many parts of the US, surface road speed limits are quite reasonable, but freeway speed limits are ridiculously low.

You are correct, by the way, as far as I know, that the 55mph speed limit was originally an energy conservation thing. This was during the oil crisis of the 70s, when it was federally imposed. Ever since the federal mandate was lifted, speed limits have been creeping back up, but at very different rates in different states.

To give a comparison, in France freeway speed limits are roughly 80mph in dry weather and 70mph in rain (I say roughly because they are, of course, in metric.) In Belgium, and the Netherlands it's 75mph, although The Netherlands has introduced many variable speed limits (electronic signs based on congestion) and recently bumped it up to 80mph on certain rural stretches (rural by Dutch standards). Germany, of course, has no speed limits at all on many long-distance Autobahns (about 50% of the network), although in metropolitan areas, contrary to popular mythology in the US, they often do have speed limits, which go by the charmingly long-winded name of "Geschwindigkeitsbeschränkung," often shortened in colloquial speech to "Tempolimit." The de facto speed limit on the unrestricted Autobahns is 125mph, since that's the fastest unmodified German cars will go.

So did some technocratic bunch of engineers evaluate the conditions in each of these countries and decide that somehow some subtle difference of geography that Germans are capable of safely driving a full 65 mph faster than Hawaiians?

I doubt it.

May I also remind the reader that East Germany used to have a rigorously enforced 60mph limit that was rather promptly lifted after the reunification, which was by no means an event of particular relevance to traffic engineering.

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#127
post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure is easy to decide songs aren't worth $0.99 when the alternative is to just take them for free, whether the owner wants you to or not.

We'd all be doing the same thing with tomatoes and chips if they could be duplicated for the cost of wiggling some electrons back and forth.

In the words of a good friend of mine: "You wouldn't download a car? Man if I could download a car off the internet for free, you bet your sweet ass I would!"

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#128
post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is such a thing as FOSS. That stands for Free and Open Source Software. There is software that is "Free" and software that is Open Source and, as I'm sure you are aware, the software that belongs to both groups is the (vast?) majority of each respective group. It is called Free _and_ Open Source Software, it is the intersection of the two groups, and it is a pretty useful group to think about when you want to b…

No, the Free Software movement and Open asource movement is completely seperated from eachother. Different names results in different ideas.

Going back and reading the initial comment, I think I see where you are coming from. The poster says "FOSS projects like GNU..." and that is off base if he was implying that GNU has anything to do with OSS. You are right, no one should be talking about a GNU as a FOSS project due to their outright rejection of the OSS ideology.

But just so we're clear, it is possible to talk about FOSS itself (the software) in a meaningful way. It's not like the term is oxymoronic or something, in fact, the two descriptions are nearly redundant when it comes to describing the rights you get as a user, which is what you should be concerned with as a user of the software.

Why shouldn't we apply this to projects as well? I guess the questions I would ask to clarify the point are: 1) What do you call a project that would like to empower users with software freedom but would also like to embrace the development style of Open Source? 2) Given that there are so many projects out there that embrace exactly that combination, shouldn't we have a name for that?

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#129

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think anyone here wants to raise speed limits in pedestrian-heavy areas. Talking about pedestrian fatalities is not constructive to an argument about freeway speed limits.

It's not an argument about freeway speed limits, but about speed limits in general and in principle. I don't know where "freeway" was introduced as a limiter.

Different roads have such widely differing conditions that it's not possible to discuss speed limits in general and come to any meaningful conclusion. Since the implicit point of an argument is to come to a meaningful conclusion, it can be assumed that arguments which do not terminate in a meaningful conclusion are excluded. "In principle" is also not an argument that will fly with a lot of hackers who reject deontology.

Re: The Pirate Bay - 9 years and still bloody runnin

#130
post #106

Earlier quoted context omitted.

DRM for music is deeply entrenched in the ecosystem. The most overt of DRM layers can't exist on old media CDs, but it's still everywhere. None of the major online music services allow unlimited sharing (of files), and even getting this far was a long legal mess, representing part of the extensive history where DRM has attempted to parasitize the legal system. http://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2011/07/are-google-mus…

I think you're stretching the definition of DRM a bit. In my comment, I was referring to the set of technologies used to make it harder to copy a legally purchased file. Wikipedia's definition is quite good, but is a little too long to repost here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_rights_management In any event, we're talking about technical solutions to licensing problems. I haven't read any reports of Google or…

It's true I'm overloading the term. Originally we were talking about DRM as an excuse for piracy; my point was that the inconvenience and restriction is all over the market, not just on an album.

That particular case was years ago, and the only time we've brushed with the RIAA. We're a very small operation and didn't bother to get lawyers involved. Paying royalties wasn't something we'd consider as the work is only superficially related to the original (by my reckoning), riding the line between parody and fundamental re-interpretation. I feel the IP test for such works is unethically restrictive and greedy.

Post reply on HN