Re: Pirate Mike defends Pirate Kim. In other news, water is wet.
"The document rambles on with details of numerous email and Skype conversations that the DoJ feels damn the conspirators because they show a clear intent to make money out of material belonging to others."
Wow! That's some damn solid "evidence" there: a journalist (Simon Sharwood to be precise) speculating on how he supposes the DoJ feels about the document THEY PRODUCED.
Really pinned everyone into a corner there.
I should commend you, though, for at least trying to provide evidence for a change. Keep trying; you'll get the hang of it someday.
LMAO @ the irony of you asserting your copyright first thing in a post about how copyright is so very unimportant.
Actually, you'd be the only one being laughed at, because the rest of us realize that a CC license is pretty much the opposite of "regular" copyright. You see, it explicitly gives you rights to share and transform the work, the only restrictions being to credit the original and to also pass those same rights forward when you do a transformation/adaptation. It practically begs you to share it and build on it.
Compare that to your "normal" copyright which basically says, "You can do fuck all with this."
That's a HUGE difference, one that is only lost on complete dunces.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Why does counter.theconversation.edu.au need a "security certificate" here, Mike?
@ "ottermaton" : So don't deal with Amazon. Problem solved.
Good advice. Glad to see you got the message.
Actually, I was pointing to your own cognitive dissonance. Everyone BUT YOU seems to understand that saying shit like "don't use Amazon then" is utterly incongruous with you coming on here and bitching about THIS site. Take your own advice: don't use it (Techdirt) then.
"Report" is all that needs done for this feeble-minded poster
I am so sick of OOTB poisoning every thread on this site that I've taken to not even reading, much less responding, to his non-sensical rants. I just hit the "Report" button. He has more than earned it.
What makes the whole situation even more annoying is that people keep responding to him, like it's gonna make any difference whatsoever. All you're doing is giving him the attention he so clearly and desperately craves and can't get anywhere else.
So, as of today I'm going to start hitting "Report" on everyone who responds to him. It's become clear that just reporting OOTB won't stop him because he's getting what he wants: attention. I'm aiming to cut off that attention.
I have some experience with Wikipedia editors and it left a bad taste in my mouth. A while back I was involved in a Linux distro and I prepared a Wikipedia page about it. A short one, just a few paragraphs. It was entirely 100% true and correct, not promotional in tone (just descriptive) and fully cited.
A few weeks later the page was deleted because one of the editors saw posts from me on that distros forum. You see, I used the same username on both places because I wasn't hiding that I had involvement with the distro. That was the only reason.
I tried to "appeal" but it all fell on deaf ears. I could barely get anyone there to even respond, much less help. A few weeks or months (not really sure) someone else made another page for the distro that was worded differently but had almost exactly the same content (and citations) for that matter. And that one was a-okay.
At that point I let the matter drop, but I do recall feeling pretty pissed off and powerless at the time.
Not sure there's really a point here, just sharing my experience.
Re: First-past-the-post. Learn it. Know it. Hate it.
while you can fantasize all you want
Why, thank you. I think I shall.
“Don't ever become a pessimist... a pessimist is correct oftener than an optimist, but an optimist has more fun, and neither can stop the march of events." - Robert Heinlein
I won't even bother to reply to the rest of your screed. I choose to go have fun.
PS: the boat I am on its a nice, little, perfectly adequate sailboat. Yours, however, looks to be a rusty old oil tanker thats been heading toward an iceberg for a long time and won't change course. Good luck with that!
Really, there are no good options, and third parties don't have a chance
I really hate this attitude, the equivalent of which is saving, "if you vote for a third party you are wasting your vote." I say NO -- if you are voting either Democrat or Republican it is YOU who is wasting your vote since both parties are essentially the same and are only looking to protect themselves.
It is the classic self fulfilling prophecy.
If it weren't for attitudes like yours third parties would have a chance.
Here's a thought: compare your moronic post that was reported into invisibility against the one that was voted repeatedly as Insightful several posts above.
It's the same thing I've said to you over and over and you can't get it through your thick skull: Google et. al. can't put anyone in jail or "murder" them "legally". That's the EXACT difference in what they're doing with your data compared to the gov't.