It's almost sickeningly ironic you utilize the phrase 'fucking evil bunch of greedy dorks.' in defense of people who:
use made up figures to support their arguments.
hate democracy [which they have actually said.]
hate the public and their interest, while thinking you should be grateful for their products, even if they are half-assed nonsense.
treat everyone as if they are a thief, even their paying customers
treat the fans like shit
treat the musicians like shit
refuse to pay musicians what they are owed [see: universal, EMI, etc.]
throttle consumers at every possible standpoint
are incapable of seeing reality, even when it slaps them in their face
are incapable of empathy on any level
are about as stupid as your average backwater Redneck [not all rednecks, as I do know some who are intelligent.]
gleefully abuse their powers to shut down negative reviews of products
abuse the current laws as much as possible to make more profit for themselves
refuse to innovate
refuse to believe piracy is not a lost sale
refuse to compete in a marketplace in which competing with superior products should be the go-to thing, but instead blame it on piracy.
make false claims; for instance, claiming the music industry is collapsing or the film industry is collapsing, when everything says 'no, you're wrong, stop being retarded.'
make up inflated numbers to give their 'research' merit, despite being debunked by top economists many times the world over.
make legislation that hurts consumers, the public, and everyone else but legacy gatekeepers.
and untold more.
And yet you call Google the evil one? Sure, Google has done some weird things these past few weeks. But nothing akin to what the thieves and liars of the RIAA and MPAA do on a daily goddamn basis.
I could write a poem about you, but that would be giving you more credit and attention than you'll ever deserve. I hate people like you, who apologize for Hollywood's actions, who apologize for the thievery, the deception, the hatred and vitriol and uselessness of the RIAA and MPAA. I legitimately hate people like you, who support corporate crones and their dolled up bitches and whores.
I like bitches and whores, men and women both. They know who they are; they don't pretend, and they're not bashful about it.
People like you enjoy pretending. The real world doesn't work on pretend. It works on function, rationality, logicality, suffering and pain and death and most of all, PROGRESS.
You support stopping progress.
And that is why I hate you. By stopping progress, you are forcing us to come to a stand-still, forcing us to stay in one age, an age of anti-innovation, anti-progress, anti-consumer, and anti-quality. You'd like it if Hollywood could continue making half-assed movies that are remakes of a rehashed film series based on a true story without the consequences of making a half-assed film.
Progress, by its' nature, cannot be truly stopped; it's an idea, and ideas cannot be killed. Innovation cannot be killed. Progress continues, even if we have to kill for it.
I don't care if you don't read this. I don't care if you shut the fuck up or continue with your nonsensical bullshit. I just wanted you to know how much I hate you, and people like you.
So kindly fuck off. I hear there's a nice place for you and your kind. It's called the cemetery, where all your lies, thievery, and corporate shilling belong. In a shallow grave.
Yet Sweden refuses to question him, though they are given every chance to, on these charges, but always refuse. Do you not wonder why that is?
Sweden just want him in their country, so they can extradite him to the U.S, so he can face prosecution for whistleblowing and Espionage, which carries with it potential death.
Unless you can provide evidence as to why this is not a logical progression of actions that point to some hefty amount of curious happenings that make no goddamn sense legally and logically, why do you try to defend Sweden and the US on this issue?
I think we all would hate what they would do, but unfortunately, they aren't the worst candidates here, by any stretch of the imagination. I fear Romney/Ryan would do far worse to the country in one term than Obama could in another four years.
In other words, we should totally allow random people to be extradited based on zero empirical evidence, no matter who they are, because the accused do not deserve a fair trial -- especially one in which they know the evidence against them and can then use it, fairly, in a court of law, because of 'good form'?
Next you'll tell me 'good form' means they throw a hissy fit in a gentlemanly manner, only to then execute you as soon as you enter China, because you saw more than you should've seen, or you're a human rights activist, or you're the Dalai Lama.
The world you live in would be utterly retarded, and one I would rather see burn than anything else.
Any logical person cares; typical procedure doesn't indicate the punching and such were necessary. If a man or woman surrenders, you cuff them; you do not punch them, you do not kick them, none of that. You do not use force when it is unnecessary and in fact, in cases where police use unnecessary force, people have gotten off because of the botched arrest attempt.
Guilty or innocent, Dotcom was treated like shit by the police, and constitutes unnecessary force; he did nothing threatening to the police, he held up his hands like you would when you were being seized as per police proecure, and he surrendered peacefully. If after the fact, they punched and kicked him, it shows use of unnecessary force. That's pretty important factor. It's not 'whining' when the police uses completely unnecessary amounts of violence against an unarmed man.
I never understand the reasoning. No really, I don't. There's no correlation between gift-giving and video games. There's no correlation between putting people inside of a room, play a few violent video games, then buy hygiene products.
Here's an idea; we take 100 participants; split them up in four groups of 25 each; first, we have the control group, they don't play violent video games. Instead, let's say they sit around, talk with one another over stuff, blahblahblah, no smart-phones either.
the other three groups, we split into 'Violent video games', 'simulation video games', and 'strategical video games.' Let's say the first group plays stuff like DayZ, Call of Duty 4 [none of the Black Ops stuff because that's about as truly 'violent' as hugging a teddy bear.], Spec Ops: The Line, stuff like that.
We then have the simulation group play stuff like Harvest Moon, Animal Crossing, et all, really calm titles.
The third group plays stuff like Civilzation, Master of the Arcane, FF tactics, blahblah.
We tell them they can play it for as long as they enjoy it, though not exceeding, let's say four hours. First, we test the control group; have them come out and pick up presents or gifts for friends and family. Then the simulation group; then the violent group; then the strategical group, based on how long they'll likely keep playing.
What do I hypothesise will happen?
There will be no correlation between hygiene products and violent video games, because the Macbeth Effect only works on people who were paranoid to begin with. If you're already paranoid, yeah you are going to suffer that effect.
It's essentially the Thompson effect, wherein a person or a group of people crowd around in a room trying to find out how to correlate things with violent video games, trying to come up with something they can blame other than themselves or the person, whose mental state was not the best to begin with.
If you can't distinquish between reality and video games, you were already off the deep end to begin with, and therefore, there can BE no correlation, because the previous mental illness suggests you were that way before playing video games. Surprising find, isn't it? Anyone with common sense knows this is already true, but everyone else wants to pretend violent video games cause stuff, even though in reality, people are just really messed up in the head.
If I wanted to blame anything, it'd be the prevalence of the media, in which their jobs are now to overblow anything in order to get ratings and views from a broken and old system. Because correlating violent video games with no penance for any sort of violence or some sort of effect only ever experienced by those inexperienced with playing games or those with some sort of paranoia doesn't make a good story or headline.
Let me try to understand your reasoning here. You think we all should post with our real names and stuff, right? You know how problematic that is?
Take Blizzard's RealID situation and turn it up to eleven in Youtube format. You see all those inane commentators? They can find out your place of residence and more just from a cursory glance at google or, if you're in the business of hating google so much you refuse to use google for some raison, blink or ask.com. Just like that and bam, they can find you.
In fact, one of the main reasons it was never implemented is because someone found out where another anonymous person lived just by his name, found out his phone number, all of it. It's real fucking easy. That's the benefit of anonymous posting; you don't have as much of a security worry with it, and there's literally nothing wrong with that system whatsoever.
The irony, of course, is that you're posting Anonymously and I'm not, yet I argue that Anonymous posting is the most beneficial. Either way, it's only a problem in how stupid people will be on youtube. Otherwise, it really really isn't and you overexagerate the problem -and- make a horrendous conclusion that no one with a thinking brain would use, because it's a real fucking stupid way of implementing the law.
Why wouldn't you name the rights holder? No, really, why wouldn't you? It complies with the law in every word and does everythign necessary to keep its' safe harbors. I'm also pretty sure it names them so the users or the holders can properly identify the legitimate takedown notice, or they can counter-it -- because that's how the goddamn law works. Otherwise, you'd have no idea who issued the takedown or who to go to, besides Youtube, to counter-claim in order to get it back up from a false claim.
You can argue all you want about semantics, because your post is nothing but bullshit. If they could get the license to upload it, it doesn't matter, because you can't check that sort of inane thing, or at least Youtube cannot. If it tried, it would cost even more money than it earns, just due to how railroaded the permission system is and how impossible it is to even get al icense to parody something.
They want it down, so be it, but they're going to get their name on it because it's required, by law and by common sense. Otherwise, users have no way to counter-claim, and surprise, they have rights too.
Why are you complaining about this? No really, why? They're not apologizing. They're saying 'sorry' to anyone who wanted to view the content but didn't get to because of a copyright takedown. All it does is hurt the consumers; do you think it actually hurts the companies issuing the takedown? Lord no. It doesn't hurt the artists, either.
So again, I ask: why do you care about the wording? Why does anyone care about the bloody wording?
Ding, ding ding! We have a winner for the least informed comment of the day!
There have been STUDIES, by legitimate companies, everywhere that have, and do state right up that DRM does NOTHING to deter piracy rates. NOTHING. They have done nothing, they continue to do nothing. The reason DRM even exists is just because the companies stop potential product leaks before the game's released. That's literally all DRM is for now.
DRM is pointless, essentially, except for not leaking your product one day ahead or so. Hackers get past it no problem. The only 'problem' is online-only DRM, and we've already seen the backlash from that with Diablo 3 and Ubisoft.
DRM is, by definition, evil. You're literally punishing your legitimate customers for paying for a product, because you think they're all just thieves or pirates or infringers and treat them as such.
CD Projekt Red said something along the lines of DRM, in fact, that point out how stupid and useless it is; did they use it? Sure. But then they sent a patch removing it. It's that simple.
The only way to combat piracy is by providing a superior service. If you ignore that, you're ignoring reality. So go ahead and ignore reality, it's not like logic's stopped you before.