151–159 of 159 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
<3
Hugging that comment gets hated? I guess I could have expanded.
Your comment didn't add anything to the discussion and could be replaced by the 'Upvote' button.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Hugging that comment gets hated? I guess I could have expanded.
It's just a HackersNewsism, stuff that doesn't contribute to the discussion, one liners or troll comments all get downvoted. Your comment didn't add anything to the discussion and could be replaced by the 'Upvote' button.
I've hijacked this thread enough, but I'd love to post this question separately. Libraries are an institutionalised form of piracy. Am I wrong here? Thoughts? I've just had a philosophical discussion with my Dad about piracy and this was one of the conclusions we seemed to make.
No, that is absurd. 1) "Piracy" is actually copyright infringement. 2) The license to read a book accompanies the physical copy. 3) Libraries are not engaging in copyright infringement. 4) Thus libraries are not engaging in "piracy". There is nothing "philosophical" about it, it's just plain old common sense .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"The first one is whether copyright infringement as I think she was part of really hurts content producers. If someone is unwilling to pay a couple dollars for a movie in iTunes, you are not likely to buy the DVD either, thus, it's not a lost sale. If, OTOH, the work gets more exposure thanks to alternative distribution networks and that generates more customer engagement, the content producer wins in the end." Serio…
What if you are not given the option to pay for it? Is it still wrong to download? Remember many people outside America can't use Netflix, Hulu, Amazon Instant Video, etc.
It's an entertainment product you can choose to access.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Picture this for a moment: It's your Birthday. Your friends invited you to the nicest restaurant in town. Very nice venue, food is great. End of meal... time for dessert. Your friends love you and, together, singe you the nicest rendition of 'Happy Birthday To You' you ever heard. Life is good. This was an illegal performance. Secret police comes in, puts your friends in prison (they stole & performed the song) and a…
What's Orwellian is your comparison of singing "Happy Birthday" to what this woman did: Mid-2010, nine sites connected to movie streaming were targeted by the U.S. government. They included NinjaVideo.net, at the time one of the Internet’s most prominent video streaming sites. One of her co-founders admitted to making 58k$ off ninja-video.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's just a HackersNewsism, stuff that doesn't contribute to the discussion, one liners or troll comments all get downvoted. Your comment didn't add anything to the discussion and could be replaced by the 'Upvote' button.
Fair enough. I'm new to posting here and being up-/downvoted; I usually just lurk.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
So do you think her common sense should have told her to keep her mouth shut? As an idealistic young American with no experience with the justice system and a firm belief that what was happening to her was wrong, I think her common sense told her she had the right to speak her mind and to crack a few jokes to mollify the terror she felt at having just received a federal prison sentence. I think that would be a fairly…
Cracking a few jokes--within what common sense would allow. Celebrating your crime--not common sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
De dure, not de facto. Show me a report of someone getting arrested for it. Hence my accurate description of his ridiculous scenario appealing to a slippery-slope style train of thought. Case closed.
It's still not a slippery slope. It's an analogy that illustrates what would be possible, de jure. Honestly, there's no slope involved at all.