He's calling him out on his obvious hypocrisy. Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't make you a hypocrite, since you're not doing something you've called someone else out on.
Example:
1. you are dressed at a nudist beach and you're making fun out of someone else who is dressed at that same beach
2. if I point out your hypocrisy my state of clothes is irrelevant to the point I'm making
Yeah and having just 2 political parties helps alleviate that fear. Socialism has to be run by the government - but make your government transparent and less bloated (military budget!!!) and presto - working socialism. You don't believe me? Check Sweden and Denmark.
No, that is not true: The August 7 order was not limited to authors "paid . . . to report or comment" or to "quid pro quo" situations. Rather, the order was designed to bring to light authors whose statements about the issues in the case might have been influenced by the receipt of money from Google or Oracle. For example, Oracle has disclosed that it retained a blogger as a consultant. Even though the payment was for consulting work, the payment might have influenced the blogger’s reports on issues in the civil action.
Judge Alsup added: "Google suggests that it has paid so many commenters that it will be impossible to list them all. Please simply do your best but the impossible is not required. Oracle managed to do it."
So if Masnick is a paid "google apologist" (really, these words have a meaning?) and a anti-IP zealot (hrhr, yeah, like atheist are zealots) - so is EVERYONE from this set of people:
(a) all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees; and
(b) employees/commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.
Ehm, where did Google ever said that Mike is paid by them? Oh, you mean when that funny "name all the blogs that speak favorably of you" thing happened? Big search conspiracy!!!! Argh, those evil smart people, making my internet easier to search. Bastards.
Links or it didn't happen. (being paid by google, that is. And no - adsense does not count)
Pattern? Like someone calling you out on your logo and you swiching it and basically not saying a thing?
Like calling sharers (that is me, I share) pirates and thiefs? Deliberately confusing theft and infrigement? Like LYING about not finding a single article "where he sided with the artist/author whose rights were being violated by infringers" (FTFY) when he has a whole page dedicated to help them adapt to reality of today (Step 2)?
If I could spell hypocrisy and irony with one word, it'd be your middle name.
yeah, it's all government fault - forget the fact that USA is not a democracy. I'd call it monetarian polycracy, but hey - it seems monetarian prefix could be added to any -cracy or -archy out there.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
but, but... piracy!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Even given ALL your claims, Mike, Aaron Swartz let himself in for it.
He's calling him out on his obvious hypocrisy. Pointing out hypocrisy doesn't make you a hypocrite, since you're not doing something you've called someone else out on.
Example:
1. you are dressed at a nudist beach and you're making fun out of someone else who is dressed at that same beach
2. if I point out your hypocrisy my state of clothes is irrelevant to the point I'm making
At best it's ironic.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah, because shit that happens in your country never leaks acid to the rest of the world. Lucky us, foreigners.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Hey man, you're feeding this troll and it's after midnight... he's going all gremlin on you. ;)
Re: End User Tickets and the real errors
Very true - though you have to take into account the dumbest users out there and dumb-proofing your user interface takes time. ;)
This comic panel springs to mind:
317 clicks has corrected the error.
Re:
Well that's what happens when college has private benefactors and therefore private interests. Actual education is now just bussiness.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dolan's tweets
You don't need to prove a negative. You also don't simply insinuate some claim and ask for evidence for contrary.
#trollism
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Dolan's tweets
Just replying to Secondly:
Manning, obviously.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Replace transplanted with traveling.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Yeah and having just 2 political parties helps alleviate that fear. Socialism has to be run by the government - but make your government transparent and less bloated (military budget!!!) and presto - working socialism. You don't believe me? Check Sweden and Denmark.
Re: Re:
Troll or sarcasm?
Re: Re: Re: Re:
NO, they are scared of small minority groups who use the guise of democarcy to try to ram their agenda down everyone else's throats.
Oh, like the movie industry? Whoops, my bad - they ARE employing around 8 billion people.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No, that is not true:
The August 7 order was not limited to authors "paid . . . to report or comment" or to "quid pro quo" situations. Rather, the order was designed to bring to light authors whose statements about the issues in the case might have been influenced by the receipt of money from Google or Oracle. For example, Oracle has disclosed that it retained a blogger as a consultant. Even though the payment was for consulting work, the payment might have influenced the blogger’s reports on issues in the civil action.
Judge Alsup added: "Google suggests that it has paid so many commenters that it will be impossible to list them all. Please simply do your best but the impossible is not required. Oracle managed to do it."
So if Masnick is a paid "google apologist" (really, these words have a meaning?) and a anti-IP zealot (hrhr, yeah, like atheist are zealots) - so is EVERYONE from this set of people:
(a) all commenters known by Google to have received payments as consultants, contractors, vendors, or employees; and
(b) employees/commenters at organizations who receive money from Google.
Not a small set. Troll harder.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ehm, where did Google ever said that Mike is paid by them? Oh, you mean when that funny "name all the blogs that speak favorably of you" thing happened? Big search conspiracy!!!! Argh, those evil smart people, making my internet easier to search. Bastards.
Links or it didn't happen. (being paid by google, that is. And no - adsense does not count)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
wah wah wah
(see what I did there?)
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Circular logic FTW!
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
You're a bit selective about who you deem worthy of answer?
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
It's because the question is the standard slanted whine that comes from people who aren't thinking for themselves. It's just whining, nothing more.
I'm going to use this answer when some of you maximalists complain about piracy.
Re: Re: Re:
Pattern? Like someone calling you out on your logo and you swiching it and basically not saying a thing?
Like calling sharers (that is me, I share) pirates and thiefs? Deliberately confusing theft and infrigement? Like LYING about not finding a single article "where he sided with the artist/author whose rights were being violated by infringers" (FTFY) when he has a whole page dedicated to help them adapt to reality of today (Step 2)?
If I could spell hypocrisy and irony with one word, it'd be your middle name.
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
yeah, it's all government fault - forget the fact that USA is not a democracy. I'd call it monetarian polycracy, but hey - it seems monetarian prefix could be added to any -cracy or -archy out there.